What are
/r/MakingaMurderer's
favorite Products & Services?
From 3.5 billion Reddit comments
The most popular Products mentioned in /r/MakingaMurderer:
The most popular Services mentioned in /r/MakingaMurderer:
DocDroid
Weather Underground
Quora
Clyp
ResearchGate
Disqus
Cambridge Dictionary
Airtable
SemanticScholar
The Intercept
Microsoft OneDrive
Ludwig.guru
Dictionary.com
Microsoft Bing
Emojipedia
The most popular Android Apps mentioned in /r/MakingaMurderer:
The most popular reviews in /r/MakingaMurderer:
Sunset was ~~5:42pm~~
EDIT: I refined my Googling because of this comment below and it appears sunset for Manitowoc on 10/31/05 was actually <strong>4:43pm</strong>
Sunset: 4:43 PM
Civil Twilight: 5:13 PM
As coincidence would have it, the property is 0.8 miles due east of the 3302 W Zander address. Also, although he says the wind was from the south or southwest, the Manitowoc airport reported wind from either the W or WNW that day whenever it was blowing (ie, from the direction of the 3302 property).
False positives are fairly common and that is why further testing is done to confirm. I dont know what the protocol is in WI but in the UK dogs are evaluated every 6 months.
Depending how the dog is trained. Some are trained speficially to locate human blood (from just bled to months/years old). They are taught to discriminate the individual scent of blood and indicate on that.
Cadaver dogs are usually trained on a combination of smells. Decomposing flesh, bone, blood etc.
Dogs are able to discriminate scent even in fires. In fact in arson detection the dog is a very valuable tool to find areas that indicate an accelerant has been used.
The best way to explain this is, if you walk into a home and smell coffee and bread baking. The dog smells the breath, urine, skin scents of the person. The yeast, the flour, the salt. The coffee, the milk, the sugar.
They can smell the past and present http://ed.ted.com/lessons/how-do-dogs-see-with-their-noses-alexandra-horowitz
False positives occur most often from accidental cueing by the handler. This is a little less likely in this case as it seems they had not yet zoned in on the area they believed was the crime scene.
rap sheet
noun
a list of crimes a person has committed or been accused of that is kept by the police
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/rap-sheet
With that out of the way, do you care to address the substance of the post? Namely, that Steven Avery is a violent abusive person and likely a rapist, in addition to being a convicted murderer.
What the hell are you on about? “Except for” is not a contradiction in any sense.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/grammar/british-grammar/except-or-except-for
>We often use except and except for as prepositions to mean ‘not including’ or ‘excluding’. They are followed by a noun or noun phrase or a wh-clause. Both except and except for are correct after a noun:
>I like all fruit except (for) oranges. (excluding oranges)
>Except for Louisa, who’s away in Berlin this weekend, we’ll all be at the party.
>She likes going to most sports events, except cricket matches.
>Except can also be used as a conjunction. We don’t use except for in this way:
>The brothers are very alike, except (that) Mark is slightly taller than Kevin.
>Except and except for are used in similar ways to apart and apart from.
I actually thought about this too. There is a whole host of programs that happened under this kind of interagency operation. It's nuts actually, and slightly disturbing when you learn all there is to know about it.
This is actually an offshoot, where police agencies got to get their own surveillance programs up and running named Stingray. These intercept local cell phone tower traffic and can pull everything off phones using them. Calls, msgs, location, etc-Voice/Data
Before Stingray was around though, a lot of agencies were getting direct intelligence but it was classified, so they'd use it as a basis for warrant but refuse to disclose it.
I remember awhile back from a few cases, the DEA was using NSA information, and were able to cite 'classified source' or 'anonymous informant' as where the evidence came from. As justification.
Im not sure if a Sheriff's Office however would get to use those services.
There were numerous challenges to this, and I think they lost a court battle that impeded their ability to operate like they had been. Im not sure if that's why Stingray developed or what, as its been too long since I looked into it. This all started years and years ago though.
lol! What a waste of time. You keep stating that Barb NEVER confirmed that she knew Bobby saw TH leave and so after lying about it for paragraph after paragraph you got your panties so twisted you wasted your time writing this trash?
lol!
Just stop lying and you won't have to waste so much time.
https://yarn.co/yarn-clip/f0857ad6-e980-4d23-91c3-821b2d2f7b3f
> If memory serves, I think even the jury was 7-5 on their initial vote for acquittal, and it took a long time (and some bullying) to win over the seven.
Source for all of this? You were there?
I get it, you are a defense attorney. I've seen your comments which assume, in general, that prosecutors are unscrupulous and care only about convictions. Not an uncommon position to be taken by people who make their living opposing those people.
>Not to push product, but my arguments (both from a procedural and substantive perspective) can be found here: https://www.amazon.com/Convicting-Avery-Bizarre-Broken-Murderer/dp/1633882551
I'll read them if you say you will respond to any comments I might have. I'm here for discussion, not reading assignments. I could refer you to about one hundred posts of mine here. Would you read them?
My opinion...they are saying "A car deer." - Typical lingo for a 10-50 at least in Wisconsin, and something that is heard quite often on the scanners and among police dispatchers especially during deer season.
Here, I removed the noise and enhanced the audio a bit.
> with zeor evidenc eof any fires
Maybe you slow down a little with the typing and try and get the letters in the correct order. ;) Now explain to us again how you can claim nobody in Wisconsin except SA had a bonfire on Halloween?
You might be shocked to hear that hundreds of people actually do have bonfires on Halloween.
>as absurd as in Airplane when TSA lets the guy carrying the Browning M1919 .30 caliber walk buy then frisks the granny.
Funny you mention that, did you know that in 2015 the TSA failed 95% of the internal tests carried out and even missed explosives strapped to people https://edition.cnn.com/2015/06/01/politics/tsa-failed-undercover-airport-screening-tests/ Not to worry though because they did manage to humiliate and embarrass most of the grannies who passed through screening.
Do try harder J, or was it the alcohol. :)
Here is something I found on a research gate website: "Heparin is the normal anticoagulant used in blood collection. EDTA is used if serum samples are used for PCR as it chelates the cations required by many of the enzymes of nucleic acid synthesis and degradation." PCR or polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is a technology in molecular biology used to amplify a single copy or a few copies of a piece of DNA across several orders of magnitude, generating thousands to millions of copies of a particular DNA sequence. In 1985 and even in the early 1990's, there was no PCR and DNA sequencing. If there was blood taken in 1985, it could have had a chelating agent that was not EDTA. So if there was another vial of blood in evidence, it might not have contained EDTA.
if you want to know what evidence I have, I would suggest you review my posts. I wrote one on the SA is guilty sub specifically outlining the questionable facts that I think speak to SA's guilt.
Definition for theory: a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact. found here #2.
Yeah, I've read through that one. I was hoping for some specific points and not just the whole transcript. But for example I agree if you only read that one he does appear to provide that a body was in the fire with out being coached. But if you read the transcript from the interview at the school just hours before that same information is coached. I think it is pretty clear that here he is just repeating the things the put in his mouth prior.
Edit: Page 12 of the transcript I linked is where they start talking about the body in the fire. The bring up that they found flesh in the fire (is this even true?), and say they know he saw body parts and ask him which parts. He says toes and it snowballs from there. In my opinion toes was coached out of him. Prior to this he is listing a lot of other things in the fire, none of which is a body or what they want to hear about.
at the root, conspiracy, is just two or more people acting together to reach a targeted goal.
It is most often used to describe harful, malicious, or illegal acts, but you could conspire with your friends to throw a surprise birthday party for another friend.
From Dictionary.com:
number 2. to act or work together toward the same result or goal.
Beyond Compare - a tool programers use to find the delta between folders and text files also includes a very easy to use image comparison tool. The trick is going to be getting the picture's land marks to line up enough using some assumed tolerance that is low enough to detect changes. The higher resolution the better.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKsbjFX4GN8 - quickly found guide
Okay, but that Wikipedia page says "The case reached the federal Supreme Court in 1991. In an 8–0 ruling on Simon & Schuster v. Crime Victims Board, the court ruled the law unconstitutional. The majority opinion was that the law was overinclusive, and would have prevented the publication of such works as The Autobiography of Malcolm X, Thoreau's Civil Disobedience, and even The Confessions of Saint Augustine."
It goes on to talk about how Son of Sam clauses are written into plea bargains, but that wouldn't be applicable to a case taken to verdict.
It seems like it would still be possible for him to get paid.
Objection - Movie Talk
"Making A Murderer" is a documentary
Source: https://www.netflix.com/title/80000770
Making a Murderer: A Netflix Original
Making a Murderer
2015 TV-14
Filmed over 10 years, this real-life thriller follows a DNA exoneree who, while exposing police corruption, becomes a suspect in a grisly new crime.
Genres:
TV Shows, Crime TV Shows, Docuseries, Crime Docuseries, Documentaries, Crime Documentaries, Social & Cultural Docs
IDK, maybe because I'm a programmer and use dark scheme text editors all day this theme doesn't bother me at all. Most programmers also use dark color schemes too. Source
The issue that counters this is scientific evidence in a science illiterate population. I read an excellent article on this yesterday (I think pointed out in this sub) about the problems with this, for judges, attorneys and juries. NO one involved in the actual trial process has an adequate clue what they are dealing with. They are completely snowed.
I think it's in this: https://theintercept.com/2016/03/25/in-las-vegas-embattled-forensics-experts-respond-to-scandals-and-flawed-convictions/
And of course, striking juries with actual knowledge about science will be their top priority out of fear that someone will actually see through the theater.
Edit: add link
If you look at what she did, there was some shady shit. Forging documents, not keeping client's money for cases separate from her own....multiple issues over a number of years....this link is for like her fourth disciplinary issue.
There is some truth to what the Prize is saying. He did his job in the 90s / early 2000s. He was one of the most respected D.A.'s in the state of WI, then he ruined his life. It's like anything...Kratz was in hot water with the OLR for the first time, this was Evans fourth time.
>The reliance by the media on law enforcement sources for so many “facts’ in cases about alleged crimes is so routine that most of us hardly think about it, and in fact have been conditioned to believe that law enforcement is generally a reliable source for this kind of information
Not to derail the discussion, but you're making an important point that can broadly include media tasked with covering the important issues in the political, military, and economical spheres as well.
I typically read a lot of political reports and opinion pieces both for "pleasure" and to keep my field of study somewhat relevant to my personal life, and appeals to authority are on revolving, prominent display every single day.
Though he can be an incendiary figure, I've always respected Glenn Greenwald for his views on what functions a journalist should serve. This is a pretty good read that broadly encompasses your point. "Adversarial" is a phrase Greenwald uses.
David Simon is another incredible resource for opinions on how best to "cover the establishment". He's given numerous talks on the subject that are available on youtube.
>So how does any journalist working in good faith make a claim that a documentary is biased because it does not include enough detail about information that would be unfairly prejudicial to mention at all?
Good faith isn't a guiding principle for certain journalists, it would seem...
Pasted from a response to someone else.
Sure. I want to put together a post with all the info that will have to wait until I get home. But Zellner has tweeted about TH's cel pings proving she left the property, and MaM2 included multiple mentions of the Whitelaw tower, so we know that Zellner is not telling the truth about having the cel data. Not to mention we've had access to the cel data for a long time.
Here are TH's call logs
https://www.docdroid.net/vOXISZd/th-calls-redacted.pdf
This is a redacted version that I found from the Inspiring Dad's blog.
Note how all the calls on Oct 31 up to and including the 12:51 call use tower 21112.
Where's 21112? Heres a map created by truther Foghaze.
21112 is Teresa's "home" tower.
Sure seems like Zellner is being dishonest, doesn't it?
Prima K had a few posts on a different site, ranting about the case and the german guy. the posts dated back to a month or two, they were deleted yesterday morning (12/20)
Can we discuss the warrantless consent search on 3/1? I'd love to hear your thoughts since you seem very knowledgeable about the Constitution. If you need more of details I've been able to find out about this let me know but it's in the first five pages (pgs 526-531 but more specifically pgs 530-531) of the 3/1 Transcripts of Brendan's ride with the investigators to the MCSD to tape the confession. It's a fascinating read as it pertains to the Fourth Amendment. Edit: add in link to the 3/1 transcript that I read Link to 3/1 transcript
Page 4, is one example. https://www.docdroid.net/2KmgtSR/mishicothstranscript.pdf.html
I do remember actually reading 2 names on something else though. Sorry there are so many News articles, Testimony and Reddit posts it's hard to keep track.
the confession you watched wasn't the first. he did so at the school, which wasn't filmed, but audio was recorded.
in his first statement, he hesitated several times, they asked him if he saw body parts, bones, etc in the fire and he didn't answer several times, they ultimately steered it back to that topic and he said toes.
he was fed "feet/foot" a couple times, which is pretty relatable to "toes".
>fassbender: "...Did you see a hand, a foot, something in that fire? Her bones? Did you smell something that was not too right?"
>brendan: "We weren't there for long...picking up the stuff."
>interview goes on for several more pages
>wiegert: "The burn pit Brendan was no bigger than this table. OK. You know how big it was. I find it quite difficult to believe that if there was a body in that Brendan you wouldn't have seen something like a hand, or a foot, a head, hair something. OK. We know you saw something. And maybe you've tried to block it out but it's really important that you remember. Thnk back."
>they keep prodding for a few more pages
>fassbender: "...You know we found some flesh in that fire too. We know you saw some flesh. We found it after all that buned. I know you saw it...Tell us. You don't have to worry about.......you won't have to prove that in court. Tell us what you saw. You saw some body parts...You're shaking your head...tell us what you saw..."
>brendan: .....
>fassbender: "You all right? You all right? What other parts did you see?"
>brendan: "Toes"
>fassbender: "...part of a foot too? What other parts of the body...Did you see part of the arm, the legs? I know. It's all right. Did you see part of her head? Skull?"
https://www.docdroid.net/2KmgtSR/mishicothstranscript.pdf.html
This is incorrect. This is the interview from 13 May 2006. Note, this is AFTER he was interviewed by good ole Michael O'Kelly on 12 May 2006.
You had my heart racing there for a minute.
I think that's a polypropylene mesh bag, like what you see potatoes or onions sacked in.
http://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Polypropylene-PE-rachel-mesh-bag-leno_1426279848.html
But I do believe that the Rav4 cargo mat was used to transport her body.
Why are you still talking to me? Go and make insipid comments while doing your best to make weak excuses to advance the cause of a murdering rapist with someone else. You're clearly not interested in evidence, just the usual Truther back slapping over minutiae.
Before you ask this might help
I know you're struggling.
Very questionable person.. I've worked with the ARMY as an MP I can normally tell when I guy/girl is lying or telling the truth in his/her motions/actions and listening closely unless they've been trained how to lie and everything about this guy RH has me saying he's guilty of something may not be the killer but he and MH know something more than there're telling that I would bet an appendage on. Watch how Mike corrects Ryan: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=mike+halbach+and+ryan+hillegas&view=detail&mid=4A09952900446F2C0DD84A09952900446F2C0DD8&FORM=VIRE
It had started to rain and not just a few drops. The tarp was to cover the vehicle until it could be secured in the indoor locked facility for processing.
In addition, cops were posted at all entrances to the ASY while the property was being searched over the various days. This included during the night too.
> if out of 100 people, 1 gives a false confession, and 25 criminals gives a true confession
And if it was the other way around? So 25 innocents give false confession and 1 gives a true confession? It seems other Reddit guys have some proof to back up this scenario (at least in the case of 15-16 year olds):
Again, check the confession at 11:27 regarding you rape statement, Brendan says SA raped her in great detail while in his "talking shit" about SA phase.
Agree with you in general, but without any rules on the confession side of convictions next we will be seeing toddlers locked up for life for confessing to murders.
> 11/06 > > > > Remiker (MTSO report) > > > > 'Upon completion in the garage, I was advised that officers were in the process of collecting 4 metal 'burning' barrels located behind BARBARA JANDA'S residence. Officers from the CASO and I assisted with the processing of these burning barrels, along with placing the burning barrels into an enclosed trailer for transport. I identified each burning barrel as items number 1 through 4. Photographs were taken of the burning barrels in their original locations. Upon completion, they were loaded into an enclosed trailer.
Here's a pic of the barrels along side the trailer they are going to be hauled off in. http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Exhibit-52-Yanda-Dassey-burn-barrels.jpg
Remiker describing when he was advised about the barrels "Uh, we were done with that about ten to ten with the garage, and we had received some information that there was -- there were some burning barrels. There were four burning barrels behind Barb Janda's trailer, and they wanted to, um, grab those barrels and put them in a -- an enclosed trailer. It was starting to rain, sleet. It was -- it was pretty miserable out there at the time, and I think we got some tarps on the barrels."
So this matches up with the above pic. If you go to historical weather it rained one time during the afternoon on the 6th in Manitowoc which was at 9:55AM. It didn't rain at all on the 7th or the 8th.
Why a barrel was marked #4 from the Avery property also I have no idea. One interesting part though if I'm remembering correctly is in one of the Brendan interviews. A detective asks Brendan about the 4 barrels behind his house and he says something to the effect of I thought there was just 3.
Derp, riiight. That's what like your entire post is about lol. Did I say I'm not good at this? So that interview had to happen during daylight between Sunday morning and Monday at 9AM.
AND HE HAS TO HAVE THAT BUTTON!!!! THE KEY iS THE BUTTON!!!
EDIT: Maybe weather history can help
With a visiblity of 8 miles, it must have been pretty dark in Manitowoc /s
IQ can definitely change over a lifetime. one of the most commmon reason IQ scores changes for the worse is for example due to poverty and stress https://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/aug/29/poverty-mental-capacity-complex-tasks
She came out here, She comes out here, She was out here.
He was supposedly expecting her to come back out to photo a loader he wanted to sell.
If I asked you if you know your mail man, would you say "he used to deliver my mail"? Of course you wouldn't, "used to" is very specific to meaning that person did something that they no longer do.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/past/used-to
>We use used to when we refer to things in the past which are no longer true. It can refer to repeated actions or to a state or situation:
This is obviously a tangent, but I do like how you want to take a paraphrased comment in a dispatch log and interpret it as gospel but not actual words coming out of Avery's mouth on video.
Yes! This was exactly what I was wondering. Glad to see others are thinking of it. To reemphasize what others have commented: this type of carbon dating most certainly IS good to an accuracy of ~1 year or maybe 2. (source: https://cams.llnl.gov/cams-competencies/forensics/14c-bomb-pulse-forensics). Also, this has at least been used in criminal investigations to determine the age of an unknown victim's body: (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257609476_Application_of_AMS_C-14_measurements_to_criminal_investigations_J_Radioanal_Nucl_Chem)
It's also worth noting that this kind of test wouldn't have the same issue with false-negatives that the EDTA test did, since the result is a date range rather than the detected presence of a chemical beyond an instrumental threshold.
Here is my opinionated understanding,
There were about 6 samples in total that were available from the car. The FBI choose to test 3. which 3 and from which part of the car does not get mentioned in the documentary. The FBI said that they did not find any EDTA in the blood sample. They needed to find it in order to confirm that the blood in the car was the same as it was from the broken vile. Then the FBI brought in an auditor, an independent party to review how the FBI does this EDTA test, and if the conclusion that they came to makes sense. The auditor says if you find EDTA, then thats it. you see it, and its there. However she explains that the problem arises when there is no sign of EDTA and wanting to lead to the conclusion that there is not EDTA in the sample. From my understanding, it is like checking someone for cancer. If you check that persons leg for cancer, you cannot say that the body is cancer free, only the leg. You would need to check the entire body and prove to others that you checked the entire body. Basically, the FBI couldn't prove to the auditor that they did check the entire "body" of the sample. All they could say is that they did not find any EDTA in whatever they did test.
That being said my limitations come from not knowing:
How much grams and EDTA is needed for grams of blood. If it was say 1:1, then even a small sample size would be indicative of whether or not EDTA was covered in all of the blood samples taken
Edit: accoring to this https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_to_prepare_EDTA_as_anticoagulant_for_human_blood_collection
EDTA makes up about .08% of the blood.
This is a common fallacy held by many. Large conspiracies almost never require full participation. Frequently, usually, they only require a small number of core participants. Self interests tend to motivate everyone else based on false premises created by the core participants. An extremely common motivator is the blue wall of silence.
it's gone!! it was https://disqus.com/by/prima_k/
this site basically has the same type of info. not sure what to make of it but definitely interesting http://www.convolutedbrian.com/an-alternative.html
Unfortunately I cannot post his direct info because he has not been convicted yet and the mods will delete it. I just did some digging and found this document and did some sleuthing. The answer is here you just have to look it up.
I have a spreadsheet with TH calls that day and names if it's any help fill in a few more details. I've redacted it a little to protect "new" names https://www.docdroid.net/vOXISZd/th-calls-redacted.pdf.html
And Steve's calls are summarised on here http://stevenaverycase.com/steven-avery-phone-call-records#sthash.KgR2jfs3.dpbs
I don't know why these parts were cut, but it looks like we've seen (at least some of *) them. Some of the missing video is actually in the documentary. The missing clips start around page 573 of this transcript.
Interestingly though, I did notice these telling lines > WIEGERT: Where are the handcuffs? On her arms or on her legs, or where? > BRENDAN: Both. > WIEGERT: OK. > FASSBENDER: Do you remember the color of the handcuffs? And the leg irons? (shakes head "no") > BRENDEN: Like regular ones. > FASSBENDER: Which would be what color? > BRENDEN: Silver. > FASSBENDER: OK.
The cuffs found in Avery's place and were submitted as corroborating evidence were hot pink and were definitely not regular. That poor fucking kid ...
The first interview is not video taped. In that interview Brendan Dassey is denying seeing any body parts in the fire pit. At that point Fassbender tells him that the Sheriff's Department and District Attorney do not believe that he could have been at the fire and not seen anything, and tells Brendan that unless he tells them what they want to hear, he faces being charged.
Read page 441 and 442 of the first interrogation:
https://www.docdroid.net/2KmgtSR/mishicothstranscript.pdf.html
They indirectly threatened to charge him if he did not tell them he saw body parts in the fire. That's coercion.
I keep hoping people will start looking over the Guy Heinze Jr murder trial from Georgia. Seems with out a PR person innocent people are really screwed. https://onedrive.live.com/?cid=04d79c9604f81326&id=4D79C9604F81326%21250&Bsrc=Share&Bpub=SDX.SkyDrive&authkey=%21AqEtAb7cM1xarBw&v=3
I do not believe you can get fingerprints off of branches. I may be wrong on this but I thought I read that somewhere. However there was DNA on trunk of car that was unidentified and not investigated.
EDIT: Difficulty range for fingerprints:
https://www.quora.com/From-what-can-fingerprints-be-lifted-and-from-what-cant-they-be-lifted
"DNA can be extracted from cells. Human perspiration in composition is just water, minerals like sodium, chloride, potassium, magnesium, urea etc. So, technically it does not contain human cells, hence no DNA. However, we constantly shed skin cells, even while stationary. This means, there could be some cellular material found in human perspiration, especially after a labour intensive activity. There is definitely a chance of finding DNA from perspiration, but one would have to look for it in a sample to be sure."
That doesn't happen in an open fire. In fact, it doesn't even happen during an actual cremation:
"Cremating at the optimum temperature (1400-1800 degrees), the average weighted remains takes 2 to 2 1/2 hours. A complete cremation is a two-step process. Firstly, the actual exposure of the deceased to several hours of intense heat and flame; after which the remains are mostly ash except for certain bone fragments, then the entire remaining ash and fragment volume is gathered and run through a processor, creating a uniform powder-like texture."
From: https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-temperature-needed-to-burn-human-bones-to-ash
> The sweat seems an odd thing to plant, how do you get sweat samples?
Sweat doesn't have DNA in it naturally. If sweat tests positive for DNA then that DNA came from skin cells that were in the DNA. So calling it "sweat DNA" is kind of bullshit.
It was skin cell DNA (likely) which could have come from anywhere, like a toothbrush.
Well....
https://www.quora.com/Is-it-safe-to-mix-bleach-and-hydrogen-peroxide
>Laundry bleach is a solution of hypochlorite (ClO-). Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) is oxidized by hypochlorite with the release of oxygen gas:
>OCl- + H2O2 → O2 + Cl- + H2O
Clorox bleach is sodium hypochlorite, NaOCl, not sure why they left the sodium out of their reaction equation. The peroxide is the H2O2. Most of us have put peroxide on a cut and seen it start foaming up, and this is the iron in your blood catalyzing the reaction of 2 H2O2 --> O2 + 2 H2O. Peroxide is pretty unstable and reacts with many things at low temperatures. But it is a pretty dilute concentration that you can buy over the counter as either the drugstore kind (3%) or oxyclean type bleach.
So with two dilute solutions of hypochlorite and peroxide mixed it will largely produce a small amount of heat, and it will bubble off oxygen, O2, (which is 20% of what you are breathing right now) but not violently (picture the foam on your cut). The Cl- ion they show above will largely go with the sodium in the bleach to form NaCl (table salt that will remain dissolved). A very small amount (minute) may combine with another Cl- to form Cl2, chlorine gas. This is essentially the mustard gas they used in WWI. If you were exposed to any appreciable amount of this you would know it quite quickly, with eye and respiratory problems. That wouldn't be the case here.
So I would scratch the wildly unstable and toxic gases part above. This is kind of an academic exercise anyway. Most people buy either one of these types of bleach or the other, and I recall reading that the investigators found one container in Avery's laundry area, not one of each.
Class dismissed!!
Here you go: http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-innocent-killer-michael-griesbach/1117935309
The German's case was his arrest in January 2006 for burglary/intimidation/trespassing. Michael Griesbach was the prosecutor in both that case and his arrest for obstructing an officer on November 6, 2005. Judge Willis was the judge in both cases.
>Are you saying Avery was sweating in the cold November autumn night, while he (I disagree he ever touched it) contacted the release lever for maybe a second at most maybe two.
That's not what I'm saying, that's what the evidence says. The weather wasn't very cold that day so I don't see why he couldn't be sweating after committing a very serious crime and moving about.
>It is clear, actually crystal clear that Avery was framed and all the evidence was planted against him. So, I am moving onto finding the real killer. So, please tell me how ryan killegas could not have committed this crime.
So what kind of evidence would be an example of something that would clear Ryan that couldn't be planted?
Well if it is figures you want from historical weather maps then
Nov 5 2005 7.35 am Temp 46F Dew Point 46F Humidity 100%
Dew forms when the temperature becomes equal to the dewpoint. Factors such as a warm car warms the air, increasing the dew point. This warm moist air also cools down when it meets the cold air and as it cools, it releases moisture which then condenses on to the nearest cold surface. And that's is usually the windscreen and the metal. The complete 24 hour readings linked below do not account for a warm vehicle placed in the middle of the night changing the dew point.
https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/wi/manitowoc/KMTW/date/2005-11-5
Disclaimer, I have only watched up through episode 9, but I do have a question about what is IMO the most damning piece of evidence in the trial - his blood in the SUV.
I read the FBI analysis of the blood here and here, as I was mostly interested in whether
A. they did any controls at all
B. they used the ACTUAL vial of blood that was purportedly used to plant evidence, as the control
It appears both A and B are true - they made sure they were able to detect EDTA in the actual sample that was under suspicion, but were not able to find any in the dried swabs taken from the SUV.
Given that, what other explanations could there be for how Steve's blood might have been planted in the SUV? Could the sample that was taken from the vial have been modified to eliminate or make the EDTA undetectable in some way?
Windless day, huh? Seems like there was a light breeze out of the west for most of the day. That would blow smoke from the burn barrel straight down Avery road, exactly where Fabian said they came in from.
Yes a State Crime Laboratory.
Guess where the RAV4 was not stored.
Ah, I'll just tell you. In nothing that even resembled a Laboratory.
Guess what temperature DNA should be stored at for months.
Okay, okay I'll tell you that as well. -20°C.
Final question for bonus marks.
Guess what the temperature was between October 31st, 2005 & April 3rd, 2006. Fine I will tell you the answer to that as well. It was above -20°C with the exception of 2 days. See full results here.
One more thing of note. When storing DNA it needs to be stored with a buffer such as in EDTA, in Tris-EDTA or as a precipitate in ethanol.
But yes you keep believing that storing the RAV4 in a locker was sufficient for the DNA not to degrade.
You know I check which way the wind was blowing that night, it was blowing in from the west... Anyone arriving on the Avery property would have smelt it. https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/wi/manitowoc/KWIMANIT33/date/2005-10-31
>I used the quote you provided me that you claimed proved your point.
I provided Colborns quote to you.
https://ludwig.guru/s/tipped+to+the+side
Doesn't support you There's a difference between tipped to the side and "slightly tipped to the side". English ftw.
I used the quote you provided me that you claimed proved your point.
Note, again, how even in your new quote, they still don't say what you said.
https://ludwig.guru/s/tipped+to+the+side
Because nobody ever said they tipped it 90 degrees on its on side.
Isn't it crazy how you keep screeching about how it's plain English but then keep changing the words that were actually used?
>Q Uh, did you look under the bookcase?
>A I'm sure it was looked under when it was tilted to the side. Yes, sir.
https://ludwig.guru/s/tilted+to+the+side
There you go, fellow fence sitter.
You are more then welcome to read this paper about brendan
Brendan and his story is why i and most like yourself took interest in MAM. There are many discussions on him via here YT etc.
This paper goes in depth about BD , his limitations etc. Its a long read but may explain reasons and possibly answer at least some of your questions.
There's also a reading of it available, I think.
Good luck and keep asking questions.
🤓
> I believe he is telling the truth, but I dont believe you have any basis from which to claim there was barely any wind or even that "barely" some wind wouldn't blow smoke towards his direction.
I personally don't know much about fires, but regarding his statements about the wind on that day, you can easily look that up in weather databases.
At the time the wind was at about 6 mp/h which wouldn't exactly "blow smoke into your face" unless you stand directly next to the fire I suppose.
It didn't rain, just look at the photos of the RAV4 and the fly-over video. Four minutes and thirty four seconds into the video it shows the RAV4 was tarpped and the dirt roads are dry. If it had rained the dirt roads wouldn't have been dry. Historical weather data also shows it didn't rain there on November 5th, 2005:
​
Another problem with your rain theory, besides all the photos showing it didn't rain, is historical weather data is online. The historical data shows it didn't rain there on November 5th, 2005:
The other problem with your rain theory is the county's fly-over video. Four minutes and thirty four seconds into the video it shows a tarp over the RAV4 and shows the dirt roads are dry. If it rained the dirt roads wouldn't been dry.
If you don't think that SA was a violent and angry man then I don't know what to say, the evidence for it is ridiculously apparent.
read this http://hubpages.com/politics/Steven-Averys-former-crimes-and-accusations-against-him
I am familiar with India's post-mortem customs and ritual. I personally have never witnessed any of them nor do I have to.
Are you familiar with Elayne Pope's work? Many are not. Her work is macabre but important.
Mrs. Pope's work is hugely influencial and meticulous. Unlike the Canadian, Mr. Fairgrieve who testified in Mr. Avery's defense, quite weakly in my opinion, Mrs. Pope for over 10 years now have been sanctioned to burn human corpses in all manner of settings for forensic study and observation. Where as Mr. Fairgrieve's only form of site experience was a crime scene itself, Mrs. Pope creates the crime scene and conditions in all scope, for study, examination and recovery purpose.
In the United States, she is the acme of scientific knowledge and study of all things relating to the burning of a human body.
Explore her work. I must caution that some of the gallery photographs are graphic.
Audacity is excellent freeware that you can edit most uncompressed sound file types with. It is made by Soundforge.
As mentioned elsehwere in the thread I would be happy to help out (it does not sound comforting that some autocompression can degrade sound so much that it would sound like a splice - but sound quality gets worse by compression).
I have some questions in general which is a daunting search of current material, so I apologize if some of these are a repost.
- What was the timeline of when they found the bones?
I am curious to map it to the historical weather data for that week which showed a max of .3 inches of precipitation on the ground. Ie: wondering if the conditions were muddy during excavation. A thunderstorm on the 5th it shows and a 4:41pm sunset. For those curious: https://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KMTW/2005/10/31/WeeklyHistory.html
Has anyone found evidence of the camera as described by the eye witnesses? I see beer cans survived some fire pits so I would be surprised if there was no evidence of trace electronics such as a digital slr camera.
I noticed that there are traffic cams on I43, junction west of avery road, has anyone taken historical footage to see if any RAV4s were spotted? (http://www.the-webcam-network.com/Wisconsin-USA/Two-Rivers/2955820.html) Or were traffic cams not a common thing yet in 2005?
Lots of substances react to luminol. Read it here:
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3448300357.html
Deer blood would react to Luminol as well as human blood...or a variety of other substances. Your argument has no merit.
This is investigated in another paper and apparently different individuals deposit DNA with their fingerprints at different rates. Some individuals do not deposit enough to identified. It appears that only half of just a single thumb print were able to be identified. So this brings up the question of whether SA was tested for the ability of his fingerprints to provide DNA that could be profiled in a controlled fashion. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268227875 quotes: "Many factors affect the deposition of DNA by touch at crime scenes, with previous reports classifying individuals as “shedders” or “nonshedders” (15–19) depending on the profiling success from fingermarks 15 minutes after handwashing. The issue of whether or not a person is a shedder and how this may or may not affect transfer of DNA is a concern in forensic science (16,20–22); however, in reality, there is no knowledge of a person’s shedder status during a criminal act."
"Five of the 10 thumbprints produced full DNA profiles using Profiler Plus with a further 3 producing 17 or more alleles such that only a single thumb print produced a very partial profile with 7 of the possible 20 alleles obtained. Similar results were obtained for the index and middle fingers (Table 1). Full DNA profiles were observed from 38% (19 of 50) of the fingermarks using Profiler Plus. Of these 50 fingermarks using all 10 donors and all 5 digits, 66% (33 of 50) generated 12 or more alleles with a further 28% (14/50) of the profiles generating at least 1 allele. A total of 696 alleles from a possible 1000 were observed. Twelve of the 24 thumbprints analyzed using the 17 loci NGM SElect kit produced 25 or more alleles (characterized as full DNA profiles when using other STR typing kits) (Table 2). Only 4 of the 24 donors gave poor results, with fewer than 12 alleles for each of the 5 digits, and only 1 of the 120 fingermarks failed to yield DNA. Of a possible 4080 alleles
These are serious allegations that need to be followed up on and have concrete sources cited.
Is it not possible for a citizen to charge a state? I believe it is easily proven that the law enforcement caused obstruction of justice caused by their tunnel vision. And if that is found to be true in a court of law, then at least can be determined as a mistrial. Along with all the other reasons that the judge should've determined a mistrial. https://disqus.com/by/prima_k/
Source for the 4:30pm call? Right here: Day 23, page 94. A lot of stuff on the telephone calls there and surrounding pages (though you'd have to go back and read the individual testimony for more detail). Last call at 4:35pm.
Also the second confession by BD made me want to vomit. No "yeahs" in this confession: https://www.docdroid.net/80khPqQ/tworiverspdtranscript.pdf.html
I'm talking about the one that OP linked above: https://www.docdroid.net/80khPqQ/tworiverspdtranscript.pdf.html
This was the one that was first audio recorded only and closely matches what Kayla says Brendan told her.
The one in the documentary was subsequent to that (where they clearly prodded the responses and led to the obviously made up rape / murder in the bedroom story).
> Just give them a read when you're done watching, specifically the parts where he talks about the sexual touching, SA beating him, and why he think SA would've killed Teresa. Those parts don't seem coerced or made up at all.
I have a bit of experience with police interrogations / question from Serial / Adnan Syed. So I'm a bit skeptical of official records as all of that required the officers to document their actions accurately. Like for example officers will often have a pre-interview with the witness BEFORE they turn on the recorder and take official statements.
Is that the first interview you are talking about? If yes, I'm not sure how you can read this and not see this as coercion and coaching. When Brendan says something they don't like, they tell him he's wrong. If he's special needs then he may change his answer not because it's the truth but because he doesn't know any better and might just think the grown ups are right.
Look at how they interrogated Steven, every single word was manipulated in to framing Steven as being guilty. Trying to make him slip up. A smart person would have trouble with that kind of interrogation technique. How do you think a special needs person is going to handle it?
I don't see how you can read that and not see it as manipulation.
I feel like you hit the nail on the head with "SA isn't the sharpest tool in the shed". It addresses your first and third points fairly well, I think. Regarding your second point, I seem to recall seeing Brendan initially tell the investigators that he went home after he got the mail. They pushed him, saying that couldn't be right. "Come on, Brendan", and such. Somebody else posted a link to his initial interview, which I'm inclined to believe more than his guided one (though, reading this, they were already trying to lead him by the nose). https://www.docdroid.net/2KmgtSR/mishicothstranscript.pdf.html
i think you'd figure it out pretty quickly, when no one responded to you. Ever. Not just in the middle of the night lol. But then again, there are a ton of shadow posts on this sub, so maybe not. Have you noticed that too?
Anyway, I found the article you were talking about. I've never heard of a Burger King receipt either. And it wasn't brought into evidence according to this list. OP didn't say how he/she obtained this, so I'm not sure if it's real. But if it's not real, someone put a lot of effort into faking it. OP here: https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/3zdiyc/complete_list_of_exhibits_entered_into_evidence/?
It not in the trial exhbits list, though only accepted exhibits are shown. Do I think he probably had a drawing? Sure. Do I think this inmate's story and drawing were credible information? No, I think if they were remotely credible then this judge would have allowed them. The judge was pretty clearly not an Avery fan. You're right, though, that we currently don't have any way to verify or discredit Kratz's statements about this drawing.
Thank you! The account creation is part of how https://hypothes.is works. I don't hold any of the data or login details. Though I agree it would be nice to have a way to comment without any need for login. I will provide this feedback to them. As for notes getting crowded, I think we will need to see frankly.
I am truly flattered about your offer as I am not a web developer ! Will chat via PM.
Good job SF. There is also 3 rivets when you look at #8478 (IMG_2249), taken from NW of SA's trailer wherever that may be..
In this airtable I linked property tags to pictures. #8138 and #8143 are in there too.
Nothing to see here in SA's burnpit...
Ohh look $17 for a blank you claim is dealer only https://www.amazon.com/Button-Ford-Remote-Focus-164-R8046/dp/B01D3OJNKM If it's the wrong model please feel free to supply the correct model and i will find you a blank.
Maybe the killer then knew where to throw the body? This is a pretty good book written by one of his first defense attorneys. I have thought for a while now that they got this one wrong too. The media was wrong about a lot of stuff. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000FCKMA6/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?ie=UTF8&btkr=1
The one thing that gets me the most -- the fetus was found separately from Laci. IF she was killed when alleged, how was fetus not intact?
Also, the neighbors across the street had their home broken into the same day she disappeared.
I remember reading a book by Alan Dershowitz aft the trial and he all but said that the police framed a guilty man.
Can't remember the name of the book now.
Edit Found it: Reasonable Doubts: O.J.Simpson Case and the Criminal Justice System https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0684830213/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_awd_3MQ2wbTFYCSCJ
I'm pretty sure I figured out what Zellner is referring to with the quote , "The Killer (devil) is in the details". The fact it's in quotes is what gave it away. It's a book title. " The Devil is in the Details" , by Ariana Overton. Go to amazon and read the back cover. http://www.amazon.ca/The-Devil-Details-Ariana-Overton/dp/1876962283#immersive-view_1455657524048 The last line of the overview on the back says , "This team is determined to find the killer , in spite of the local sheriff and the coroner , who view the FBI's intrusion as a challenge " !!
All the evidence re 911 points directly to Saudi Arabia but most of that evidence has been purposely hidden. I don't know how closely elements of our government are tied to 911 but it is reasonable to wonder.
Read about the Bush family's thirty-year private business relationship with the Saudis and the Bin Laden family. http://www.amazon.com/House-Bush-Saud-Relationship-Dynasties/dp/0743253396
You have said that a projector couldn't make an enlargement of that size , but some have variable lenses (ex. http://www.amazon.com/Artograph-Prism-Opaque-Projector/dp/B0006TZNRA ) so if he set the lens to reduce the image and projected from a close distance it would work.
If you're an artist you should see that, while its by no means a skilled rendering, likelihood that someone without drawing skilla could make the eyeballs, pupils, and hairline match that exaxtly is next to zero.
btw - there's a similar story where a victim misidentified a man as the rapist and DNA evidence cleared him 10 years later. She felt horrible and ended up writing a book with the man who she wrongly accused - Picking Cotton. http://www.amazon.com/Picking-Cotton-Memoir-Injustice-Redemption-ebook/dp/B001VLXNN8/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1455822240&sr=1-1&keywords=picking+cotton+by+jennifer+thompson-cannino+and+ronald+cotton
I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Dave's claims. I'm not so sure they filmed Penny's rape , but I think police recruited Gregory Allen to perpetrate the crime because he looked like Steven Avery , and then they took care of the rest , by leading the victim to Steven to frame him in retaliation for pointing a gun at his cousin (the daughter of a deputy).
I'm also pretty sure I figured out what Zellner is referring to with the quote , "The Killer (devil) is in the details". The fact it's in quotes is what gave it away. It's a book title. " The Devil is in the Details" , by Ariana Overton. Go to amazon and read the back cover. http://www.amazon.ca/The-Devil-Details-Ariana-Overton/dp/1876962283#immersive-view_1455657524048 The last line of the overview on the back says , "This team is determined to find the killer , in spite of the local sheriff and the coroner , who view the FBI's intrusion as a challenge " !!
This is info that's in textbooks and the kind of periodicals you need to go to a library to read. This book http://www.amazon.com/Prison-Masculinities-Don-Sabo/dp/1566398169 touches on it fairly well. Basically, men who feel the need to hit women see everyone as either a dominator or a victim. So in a prison without women, they just go looking for victims to make sure they're perceived as dominators.
According to this book I am reading, their names are William and Billy jr. Maybe they changed the name to Steven? not sure.
a lawyer can believe his client is likely guilty, and even be pretty certain based on the evidence.
the point i'm making is that a lawyer cannot have evidence of guilt and keep it "for internal use". both sides are obligated to disclose material evidence to each other.
i would recommend Kirk Makin's "Redrum The Innocent", which tells the story of an infamous murder/false conviction/bumbling police investigation story in Canada around the same time coincidentally as Avery was being framed up for the assault conviction that put him in jail for 18 years. It has a good section on the appeals process followed and how the defense argued that the prosecution was not disclosing pertinent information from their investigation.
of course, there is always a grey area in these matters. what constitutes material evidence/information? generally, the investigators offer up whatever info/evidence is requested specifically on top of whatever they dutifully disclose as material. however, you get into semantics and bullshit sometimes. e.g. defense asks for anything from the investigation relating to the victim's fibres, and the investigators comply to the literal request but then don't offer up further fibre evidence that they dealt with that they discarded from their case because it pointed away from the suspect/defendant.
I don't think he testified though. My guess now is that was the price tag for either Sherry Culhane, the one who contaminated the bullet dna, or Marc LeBeau, the FBI expert who only tested half of the blood swabs but went on record saying the remaining untested swabs were positively Avery's.
Btw, I found Marc LeBeau wrote a book... http://www.amazon.com/Drug-Facilitated-Sexual-Assault-Forensic-Handbook/dp/0124402615/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1453225254&sr=1-1&keywords=Marc+LeBeau
I wonder if this book can be shown to invalidate his testimony. Meaning he wasn't even following his own advice. The $12k basically being witness for hire scenario.
From the Avery trial transcripts March 8 2007
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Jury-Trial-Transcript-Day-19-2007Mar08.pdf
Page 111
[Strang] Q Okay. All right. And, um, do you remember where -- How did you know the woman was taking photographs?
[Buchner] A I saw a woman taking photographs. I saw a camera.
(Camera found in burn barrel: http://www.amazon.com/Canon-PowerShot-3-2MP-Digital-Camera/dp/B0001G6U4I )
Page 117
[Gahn] And you can't tell us, though, to the exactly what day it was you made these observations?
[Buchner] No.
Q And can you say for sure whether it was the week of October 31?
A No.
~~
Q Could it have been two weeks before?
A Yes. I -- I don't know.
Q So you don't know exactly when it was you saw this woman taking pictures?
A No.
Q And do you remember -- Well, let me ask you this: How close did you get to her?
A I have no idea how far away it would have been. I was in a school bus, dropped kids off and drove away. I'm --
~~
Q Okay. Could you just give us an idea --
A Um --
Q -- of how far away she was when you saw her? And it's okay if you can't.
A I -- I have no idea.
(points out location on map)
Page 120
[Gahn] Do you know how many cars she was taking photographs of?
[Buchner] No.
Q And, um, could you describe any of the clothing?
A No.
Q Could it have been a man with long hair?
A I don't think so.
Q Okay. I -- I'm just -- I know -- You're -- you're sure it was a woman?
A Yes, I remember it being a woman.
Q Okay. All right. Thank you so much, Ms. Buchner. Appreciate it.
This book is about another framing www.amazon.com/Framed-Google-Maps-Lynne-Blanchard-ebook/dp/B01625QUUK/
Entire trial is available for viewing as well but I warn you - it is very long (10 weeks) and very, very boring.
>It's approx. a quarter mile, right?
I think that's about right. There's a larger version of that photo in the original post if you have use for it. In the testimony she describes the drop off point as the area circled in that map. I believe it's the end of the pavement at Avery Road.
Buchner http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Jury-Trial-Transcript-Day-19-2007Mar08.pdf
From that distance, do you think you would be able to tell if it was a man or a woman, and if they were holding a camera like this one?
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-PowerShot-3-2MP-Digital-Camera/dp/B0001G6U4I
The bus driver's testimony is here:
Buchner http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Jury-Trial-Transcript-Day-19-2007Mar08.pdf
She describes the bus drop-off point as the end of the pavement at Avery Road, and the "Long Road" as the gravel driveway that leads to the trailers. Blaine testifies that it takes about 3 or 4 minutes to walk home. If the bus driver went down to the loop, that would be right in front of his house.
I think the measured distance is about 310m or just under a quarter mile. From that distance, do you think you would be able to tell if it was a man or a woman, and if they were holding a camera like this one?
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-PowerShot-3-2MP-Digital-Camera/dp/B0001G6U4I
As I mentioned in another post just now, the bigger question would be if the bus driver saw Teresa when she dropped of Blaine and Brendan, and Blaine and Brendan both walked down the long road home directly towards the van and Teresa, why didn't either one testify that they saw Teresa taking pictures of the van?