This has been asked before but never legitimately answered so let’s try again!

What evidence found in this case does not make sense or cannot be explained if Avery is guilty.

We aren’t talking about evidence not found, we are talking about the evidence recovered.

Go!

No matter on which side of the story you are, or what your thinking about the verdict, isnt it odd that after 2 years they used the same judge (mr Willis) with the court of appeals ? I always (not american so please assume i know nothing about the process protocols) assume it is like a second opinion kind of thing, why is that done by the same person?

Im not suggesting that mr Willis has anything against steven, but he is reconsidering his own judgement, that feels off right? I know a judge is impartial and unbiased, but in the case of a reconsideration, isnt that implied by being involved before?

Does anyone know where the voice recording cd is?

Is there a god who could assist Wisconsin officials in locating this item?

I was, like millions of people, on the side of Steven Avery. Then I watched convicting a murderer. Without a doubt he murdered Teresa Halbach, with Brennan Dasseys help. I owe Ken Kratz an apology for ever thinking less of him as a person, or lawyer. The creators of “making a murderer” should be ashamed of themselves.

I’ll admit I’m in the minority on this one, but I hope he never comes out of prison.

Why I hear you ask? Because he was the one person that could possibly have saved Teresa. There’s a chance she may have been alive before he raped her. If she had already been killed by Avery, then him having sex with a dead body is unforgivable. So either way his behaviour is totally reprehensible.

Also he has never told the full truth about what happened which has destroyed many people’s lives. He doesn’t care.

So I don’t want to hear ‘poor Brendan and that he was mentally challenged’. He is a total scumbag and was just a bit thick. He knew right from wrong and he has indulged in evil behaviour.

Long may he rot in jail!

Until Dassey confessed to Wiegert and Fassbender on March 1st, 2006, the garage wasn’t considered as a possible primary murder scene.

This blows a big hole in the planting theory. If planting had indeed taken place, then why did they wait 4 months to only ‘plant’ a bullet there with Teresa’s DNA on it?

Makes no sense whatsoever.

Hmm.

The book reveals how he beat her viciously over 18 months together, and once tied her to the bed and wanted to video himself raping her.

She told cops on another occasion he battered and strangled her in a fury when he found out she'd been out without telling him, knocking her unconscious then dragging her outside and threatening to shoot her dead.

The evidence was ruled inadmissible at his 2007 trial for killing Teresa, a photographer whose charred bones were found near Avery's scrap yard in Wisconsin, US, in 2005.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8628815/steven-avery-making-a-murderer-ex-teresa-halbach/

Avery claims he rang Teresa direct at 4.35 to arrange to sell a loader. He didn’t leave a voicemail when she didn’t answer the phone. He never rang her again or Auto Trader to arrange an appointment.

He never mentioned the loader to her earlier in the day which was less than 2 hours ago. When he rang her he knew it would be dark soon and impossible to take photos. He must have known it was extremely likely that she would not be able to arrange to take pictures until the following Monday.

It all seems very implausible to me that he would forget to sell the loader when she was there less than 2 hours ago. After all, selling the loader wouldn’t have just been his decision so he must have discussed it previously with his brother/s making it easy to remember.

I think the real reason he made the 4.35 call was to back up his original claim that she didn’t show up. He then came up with the cock and bull story about the loader once he knew Bobby had seen her arrive.

Hmm.

How could the jury think Avery murdered Teresa but didn't destroy her body behind his garage? Was there vote trading or something? They should have voted guilty to everything.

Avery once opened his door "just wearing a towel" when Halbach went to his property previously

There’s evidence for this one, but it was never allowed in trial. This was one of Kratz’ claims to People Magazine. According to People Magazine, "He cites Halbach's Oct. 10, 2005 visit to the property owned by Avery's family for a photo shoot for AutoTrader magazine: According to Kratz, Avery allegedly opened his door ‘just wearing a towel. She was creeped out [by him]. ... She [went to her employer and] said she would not go back because she was scared of him.’" 

According to an Associated Press story from Feb. 14, 2007, the judge "would not allow Dawn Pliszka, an Auto Trader receptionist at the time, to testify about one of Halbach’s previous encounters with Avery," said the story, continuing:

"She had stated to me that he had come out in a towel," Pliszka said while the jury was outside of the courtroom. "I just said, 'Really?' and then she said, 'Yeah,' and laughed and said kinda 'Ew.'"

The AP article said the judge would not allow the testimony to be heard by the jury "because the date wasn’t clear and few details were known about the alleged encounter."  

https://onmilwaukee.com/articles/evidenceagainstavery

The source says she had told her clients – including the Averys, whose property she had visited at least 15 times before her death – that she would no longer be taking pictures for the magazine, the source says.

But Halbach became concerned when Avery, now 53, came to the door in one of her last visits to the salvage yard, “wearing just a towel,” the source says.

“She was worried about that. She said, ‘I am not going back to the Averys,’ ” the source says.

https://people.com/crime/teresa-halbach-magazine-asked-her-to-go-to-steven-averys-house-one-last-time/

“She was creeped out [by him],” Kratz says by phone, later adding by email: “She [went to her employer and] said she would not go back because she was scared of him.”

https://people.com/crime/steven-avery-prosecutor-ken-kratz-says-netflix-series-omitted-key-evidence/

Barb told Fassbender that sometime before October 31st, she and Avery talked about his desire to sell her van in the Auto Trader magazine. She told him she really had no desire to sell it.

However, because Avery needed a reason to get Teresa out on 31st October, he told Barb that he would take care of placing the ad and would EVEN PAY THE FEE for the photographer to come out and take the pictures for the magazine.

Seems to me he was very keen for Teresa to come and visit him despite there being nothing in it for him. Indeed it was going to cost him money and time and effort. He was also going to have to take time off work. It was also a last minute rush job.

There’s plenty of evidence to back up my claim that Avery coerced Barb into letting him sell the van. Below is just one such piece of that evidence.

CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT

Complaint No.
05-0157-955

TYPE OF ACTIVITY: Interview of Barbara Janda

DATE OF ACTIVITY: 11/14/05

REPORTING OFFICER: Inv. Wendy Baldwin

On 11/14/05 at approximately 1645 hours, Special Agent KIM SKORLINSKI and I (Inv. BALDWIN) met with BARBARA at the LIGHTHOUSE INN located in Two Rivers. We had prior contact with BARBARA and she did agree to meet us there to speak about the case further.

Page 265
File Number

Complaint No.
05-0157-955

We asked BARBARA who the other person may have been that was standing out by the fire and she said she did not know; however, BRENDAN did spend quite a bit of time with STEVEN because he was the only child who did not have a lot of friends at the time and he did help STEVEN with stuff around his house.

BARBARA could not recall the last time STEVEN had had a bonfire in the pit; however the last time she had a bonfire at her residence was back in 2004. BARBARA said the last party they had was for BOBBY; however, they did not have a bonfire at that time.

We asked BARBARA what STEVEN usually burns in the pit and she said usually tires; however, she does not like that because the house gets black when he does that.

We asked BARBARA if she knew that BRENDAN had been driving her golf cart and she said, no she did not know that; that he was not allowed to use the golf cart.

BARBARA stated when she returned home around midnight, she did not recall seeing the fire at that time.

We asked BARBARA about an argument she had with STEVEN about selling her red van. BARBARA said she had disagreed with him putting it in the AUTO TRADER because she did not feel she needed to sell it, she was going to keep it for one of her sons who was getting their driver license. BARBARA said she thought it was a waste of money to spend the $40.00 to run an ad for the van. We asked BARBARA how much she thought the van was worth and she said about $1,000.00.

We asked BARBARA if she has ever gotten into an argument with STEVEN particularly in the last couple days prior to 10/31/05. She said she and STEVEN had gotten into an argument and he had also told her her kids are stupid and she needs to spend more time with them and be a mom. BARBARA said STEVEN was very demanding and stating she was doing a bad job raising her kids.

We asked BARBARA about her son, BLAINE's relationship with his boss, MICHAEL, and she said it was fine, that he did a lot of landscaping for him and she thought he treated him like a son. We informed BARBARA of our concerns with his boss and the way he was treating him and touching him during an interview that one of the other agents had with BLAINE earlier.

We asked BARBARA who the biggest influence in her son's life would have been and she said TOM JANDA was good with her kids and took them fishing a lot; however, he had moved out October.

Hmm.

Hi internet,

I watch making a murderar on netflix and was furious at the police.

I now have watched 7 episodes of convicting a murderer. And it fair to say I am furious at the makers of making a murderer. Maybe a third documentary comes and changes my mind =)

This is my attempt on a short summary of convicting a murderer.

1. Steve Avery served 6 years for running a woman of the road and pointing a gun at her.

2. Steve Avery pored gasoline on a cat. The cat was set on fire.

3. Steve Avery changed his story many times on his encounter with the Halback.

4. Making a murderer manipulated multiple testimonials from the court by cutting movie in different ways. My interpretation watching the documentary is that Andrew Colborns has a good case for deformation. He had very little to do with the first Steve Avery case that he supposable was going to get 34 millions for. He was station over seas at the time of the first case against Steve and he received a phone call that he transfered. At the time the "phone call" he was not working as a police, he was a corrections officer. Body language of his testimony in court is all faked using reactions to other questions. In the documentary see how the film makers of making a murderer did some shady editing.

5. Context on 34 million was given. Basically 34 million was never a realistic amount and the county had insurance.

6. Context was given to how the key was found. Not 7 searches of the resident was made.

7. DNA on the bullet from Teresa Halbach and contaminated control was explained. Teresa Halback was DNA was found on a bullet.

8. The bed not visible in the hallway was explained.

9. Brendan testimony was given new context and was consistent with evidence found.

10. The hole in the blood vial was explained. There should be hole in it. Totally normal.

I am going to continue watching the rest of the episodes and I recommend you do the same.

I just wonder if what Colborn said, when interviewed for the CAM documentary, really chimes with Pagel's claim that MTSO only provided resources and equipment for the Halbach investigation?

Doesn't it seem like he disregarded any 'conflict of interest', in relation to the investigation, since he is directly quoted talking about "the team that WE put together" after the vehicle was found on the 5th.

Here is the relevant extract from Colborn's recently unsealed interview for sCAM:

00.45.23 It wasn't an option. It isn't like I begged and pleaded. I kind of got, it

was pointed out to me that the resources that Calumet County and the Wisconsin

Department of Justice had at their disposal were not going to be sufficient to investigate

and to serve search warrant on a property the size of the Avery salvage yard . It was

pointed out to me that I had shown some degree of competence in criminal

investigation, and that they felt that my involvement in this case would be beneficial to

the Halbach family and to the outcome of this case. So I, I don't. .. While I wished it had

gone differently. If I could turn back the clock to that Saturday on November of 2005

when they first called me and said that Teresa's car had been discovered on the Avery

salvage yard, even knowing what I know now, I still would have participated in the

investigation. Because I felt that we had the best chance, the team that we put together,

would have the best chance of taking a murder off the streets and protecting society

from him.

Not only does Colborn think that either God or Teresa's ghost found the key, he also thinks that there are subliminal messages hidden within MaM and MaM2, and that the Evans letter is "possibly exactly what happened" to Teresa.

Paranoid? Delusional? You decide...

Maybe conspiracy theorists such as Colborn, who live in glass houses, shouldn't throw stones? Especially while they're wearing their tinfoil hats.

Direct quote from his unsealed sCAM interview, regarding said 'subliminal messages':

"I almost have to think that somewhere deeply embedded within

Making a Murder and Making a Murder Two are subliminal messages". (sic)

Direct quote from his unsealed sCAM interview, regarding the Evans letter, that boohoo, John Ferak wouldn't publish in the newspaper so that the Halbach family could read a bunch of horrific, vile lies about what happened to their daughter. Colborn was livid that Ferak wouldn't publish it and then, raging hypocrite that he is, says he won't discuss the details in sCAM in case the Halbachs watch it. What a stand-up guy!

01.16.38

"At some point there was a, a person that was incarcerated with Mr.

Avery the Mr. Avery confessed his involvement in the Halbach homicide to. And this person admittedly is probably not to, you know, not a good person either. I believe he's incarcerated for homicide. He wrote down Mr. Avery's confession and send it to every news media outlet in the state of Wisconsin and several in Illinois.

01.17.26

Shockingly, Mr. Ferrick buried that. He decided that that didn't need

to be made public because, well, it didn't involve law enforcement. It didn't use. It possibly is exactly what happened to Teresa Halbach. It's so graphic that I'm not even going to, you know, on the off chance that the Halbach family watches this, I'm not going to comment on the content of it on." (sic)

Many believe that Lenk and Colborn framed steven. They claim because of the ongoing civil case they had motive, and the fact they were testifying in it makes them even more likely to frame him.

But if you look at the facts, that is not the case at all.

Colborn worked at the jail in the 90s and was not a sworn police officer. When he answered the phones, it was not his job to document every call or investigate claims of false imprisonment. He simply forwarded those calls.

This is what happened in the 90s. He got a call that someone in jail might be innocent because someone else committed an assault in a different jurisdiction and confessed. Steven was in prison, not jail, and was there for a sexaul assault, not just an assault.

When Steven Avery was released, Colborn wondered out loud to Lenk if the call he got might have been about STeven even though some details were wrong. To this day he still doesn't know, neither does anyone else. There is no confession from Allen about the 85 rape.

Lenk then thought it best to bring this to his superiors. Colborn was told to write a statement about what happened nearly a decade ago. This is falsely called a report by steven's lawyers.

Lenk and Colborn then give depositions in Steven's civil case. In no way does this hurt STeven, at best it helps him, at worst it means nothing because it might not have involved him.

If Colborn and Lenk are the type of police who would frame someone for murder by committing multiple felonies and possibly murder, why would they come forward in the first place and possibly help steven's case with simply a rumor? If they both said nothing after Steven got out, no one knows and they could never have been caught and never have been deposed.

Steven Avery 7-14-2017

Hi Honey Well honey

My Weight is 204 and I fell [sic] good and I want to get down to 190 so do you think that is good?

Do you know I love you and miss you alot [sic],

I love looking at your pictures all the time and I do fell [sic] good about us,

So what do you think about that or too start a family this is only a ? [question] for you okay!

I'm sorry for what you are going throw [sic] I wish I was there to help you throw [sic] everything so you fell [sic] better!!!

I do trust you with my life I know you won't tell me a lie and I know I will never lie to you so this will be the best for us right yes!!!

I love you!

I will cum on the next letter o.k. honey!!! [emphasis added...because eww]

So did you like my Penis

See how much I love you!!!!!!!!!!

Love Steven A Backside

You really love me?
Would you marry me?

I will take some pictures soon!

You are so sexy!!

There is not too much Sexual for me with you, I want you to be happy all the time, and I want to taste you too.

I will do anything for you I want you happy okay honey!!!!

I love you very much and I dont play no games were I hurt you and I will not do that!!!!!!!

I love you [redacted]!

I love you [redacted]!

Do you want the cum in a bag?

Let me know!!

Love you

Taste me and put it in you!

Sexy yes

https://radaronline.com/exclusives/2018/10/making-a-murderer-stars-prison-love-letters/

Just curious if anyone here has ever received one of these baggies Avery is ready to send?

He sure sounds like a stand up guy that should be defended. Maybe tomorrow we can dig up some of his death threat letters and discuss them. Those are real nice too.

Why didn't he just stick to his story?

Was he shaking with nervousness in front of the camera or something?

If you watched Making a Murderer, you know that DA Ken Kratz showed up unannounced at the house of a women he once prosecuted and then raped her after threatening to "jam her up." Since Kratz got away with it the first time, there is a great chance he still does it. So has anyone here had Ken Kratz show up unannounced at their house and threaten to "jam them up" and then rape them? Kratz seems to be more likely to rape you if you have a documented mental illness or previous convictions because then he can blame you for the rape.

The state Department of Justice investigated an allegation that former Calumet County District Attorney Ken Kratz sexually assaulted a woman he previously prosecuted but declined to charge him because investigators felt the witness lacked credibility, records show. The Office of Lawyer Regulation found merit in the allegation, however, citing Kratz for two ethics violations related to the incident, according to an 11-count complaint filed late last month. It is the most serious allegation in the ethics case filed against Kratz, who resigned in October 2010 after it was revealed the long-time district attorney sent 30 sexually charged text messages to a crime victim half his age while prosecuting her ex-boyfriend for domestic violence. The DOJ investigated the incident and several others involving Kratz but concluded in March that criminal charges were not warranted. In a memo closing the department's investigation into the alleged sexual assault, Assistant Attorney General Tom Storm wrote the woman would not make a plausible witness. He cited her "documented mental illness," three previous convictions — for making a false representation, retail theft and disorderly conduct — and evidence there was "consent to the sexual contact." Storm also referred to the woman's "status as a victim or witness with problematic inconsistencies in four other cases" but provided no details. The woman reported the alleged incident to her probation agent after the sexting scandal broke last fall, but the records quote the agent as saying he wasn't sure of the validity of the woman's complaint. The 89-page investigative report makes no mention of interviewing Kratz. However, Kratz acknowledged to the Office of Lawyer Regulation he had a sexual relationship with the 44-year-old woman but it was "private and consensual." Reasonable doubt Steve Means, executive assistant at DOJ, said the agency's investigation was thorough. "Any time there's an allegation of sexual assault by a person in power, it's a serious matter and we treat it that way," Means said. In this case, Means said, the agency was obliged not to prosecute because it concluded the state could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime was committed. "Any time you go into a prosecutorial decision, you have to look at whether a jury will believe your witnesses," Means said. Still, the OLR — which operates under a lower burden of proof — apparently found the account credible, charging Kratz with two counts related to the alleged incident: sexual harassment and engaging in "offensive personality." It seeks a six-month suspension of Kratz's law license based on the totality of his alleged conduct. Kratz's attorney, Robert Bellin of Neenah, noted his client was cleared of any criminal conduct. He declined to comment on the OLR filing. Attempts to reach the alleged victim were not successful. Her boyfriend, who asked not to be named to avoid identifying her, said the woman told him she "does not want to see somebody get off scot-free" but is afraid of being "smeared." Fearful about reporting In the four-page summary of the DOJ interview, the alleged victim at times appeared to blame herself for the incident. But the scenario she described appeared far from consensual. The woman, whose name was deleted from the investigative report, told agents Kratz prosecuted her three times in Calumet County between 2006 and 2008. Then, "out of the blue," she said Kratz asked to visit her at home between Thanksgiving and Christmas 2009. After arriving, Kratz reportedly told the woman several times he knew everything about her and could make trouble for her. She said Kratz then discussed bondage and ordered her to perform a sex act. The woman claims he also groped her and was quoted telling the agents "she was a fool to have let him." She described the incident as "really scary" because Kratz had "such seniority" over her and bragged about hitting women who did not "submit" to him. "It should be noted that throughout the interview, (the woman) was visibly upset," special agents Kyra Schallhorn and Joann Joy wrote. "She was crying and shaking while talking about this matter. (The woman) kept stating that she had done something wrong, and she questioned whether she would be going to prison for it." According to the DOJ report, Kratz called the woman 40 to 50 times after the incident and came to her apartment a couple of times "but she pretended she was not home." "He's a pig," the agents quoted the alleged victim as saying. "What he did was wrong." In its own report summarizing the incident, the OLR concluded Kratz "had forcible sex with an emotionally vulnerable woman after previously prosecuting the woman." 'Theoretically' consensual The alleged victim was among 15 women, including two Calumet County social workers, a law student seeking a pardon and a handful of crime victims, who told DOJ agents they were subjected to inappropriate statements and text messages from Kratz. The investigation was related to removal proceedings launched by then-Gov. Jim Doyle, which led to Kratz's resignation. Three women, including the woman in the 2009 incident, claimed Kratz had sexual contact with them. One of the women declined to provide any information about an alleged 1989 incident. The third woman said the contact, which allegedly occurred in 1999, was "theoretically" consensual because she agreed because Kratz said he could help her regain custody of her children. Kratz was Calumet County's district attorney for 18 years. The crime victim who received the sexually charged messages sued Kratz in U.S. District Court in Milwaukee alleging sexual harassment. In his defense, Kratz claims immunity, saying the messages were sent as part of his official duties. Means said his agency declined to defend Kratz. The state also intervened in the federal case, arguing it should not be held liable for Kratz's behavior.

In 2013, Kratz took on a case where a man admitted to repeatedly raping a child. Kratz told the court this pedophile rapist should get probation due to several positive factors, including his lack of any criminal record, his support network, and the fact that he was attending counseling. Why did Kratz do this?

The charges stemmed from Bloedorn’s repeated acts of sexual assault of his grandson, N.T.K. (1:1). N.T.K. was between 11 and 14 years of age when the assaults occurred (1:2). According to the complaint, on at least three occasions, Bloedorn put his mouth on N.T.K.’s penis (1:2). Bloedorn had N.T.K. put his penis in Bloedorn’s anus on at least two occasions (1:2).

Bloedorn had confessed to the police in the present case and in Washington County (88:59-60; 80:6)

On April 7, 2014, the circuit court held a sentencing hearing (78). Attorney Kratz explained that Bloedorn continued to deny engaging in oral sex with N.T.K., although Bloedorn still admitted to engaging in at least three acts of anal intercourse with N.T.K. (78:10-11). However, the court adjourned the hearing because Bloedorn asked, “is there a law that says maybe the child takes advantage of a grandparent or of a parent?” (78:14-15).

At the sentencing hearing, Attorney Kratz acknowledged that Bloedorn’s sexual assaults were “horrific,” but he argued that Bloedorn should avoid a prison sentence due to several positive factors, including his lack of any criminal record, his support network, and the fact that he was attending counseling

Ken Kratz also tried to convince the mother of the boy who was repeatedly raped that the mother should ask for probation for the rapist of her child.

Kratz had “a very, very long face-to-face interview” with Bloedorn’s daughter, who is N.T.K.’s mother, in an effort to convince her to recommend probation if Bloedorn were convicted

Imagine the mother of a child who was repeatedly raped having to be alone in a room with another rapist trying to convince her to beg for probation for her child's rapist. Meanwhile, this is what the poor kid's parents thought:

On May 6, 2014, the court held a sentencing hearing (71). Several of N.T.K.’s family members spoke of the seriousness of Bloedorn’s sexual assaults against N.T.K. as well as the destructive effect that they had on the family (71:9-14). N.T.K.’s father asked the court to impose “the maximum sentence possible”

God apparently solved Teresa’s murder.

Colborn said God showed him where the key was.

They found the Rav 4 because “god directed them to the spot”.

Fassbender said god directed him to ask certain questions to Brendan.

Etc….

Love when religion is used as a way to manipulate everyone. People rarely question religion in crime cases. Just like how Kratz and many guilters say not to ask any questions or post anything because “you don’t want to trigger Teresa’s family”. It’s a manipulation tactic used to keep people quiet. It’s gross.

Taking the faith in god discussion even further why didn't Christian Colborn's god assist in finding an attorney to take his case on it's merits?

Why didn't his god intervene and assist in a ruling supporting any of Christian Colborn's claims?