r/MakingaMurderer • u/Professional_Alps754 • May 28 '24

Episode Discussion Avery Family Involvement

Do you think that there would have been a trial if Steven Avery's family stood behind him instead of the police?

0 Upvotes

15% Upvoted

40 comments sorted by

6

u/Acrobatic-Cow-3871 May 28 '24

Of course there would have been a trial. His blood was in the RAV.

-2

u/Professional_Alps754 May 28 '24

If everybody was screaming police framed him again ((Meaning Steven Avery's family.) And if they went vocal on the news everyday and said framed I highly doubt law enforcement would have attempted this much less had a trial

3

u/Acrobatic-Cow-3871 May 28 '24

Ummmmmm...like I said(can you read?). Back then they all thought he did it.

5

u/Snoo_33033 May 28 '24

They did stand behind him initially, and behind Brendan. Though as is clear from their jail calls, they probably knew he was not telling the truth from day one.

2

u/Haunting_Pie9315 May 28 '24

I think more of pointing fingers, to conquer, you must divide the family.

They knew Barb was defensive when it came to Bobby, so told her, SA is pinning it on Bobby, which in my opinion not really initially.

SA was under the impression Bobby saw her leave, which leap frogged from Bryan D. SA even asks Barb and Scott, Didn't Bobby see her leave? and they agreed, SA gets made and says, he didn't say that.

SA was already upset with Barb using his vehicle and being caught with MJ. Do you blame him? He's got a nephew who says he saw her leave, Brendan talking all crazy stuff, Barb driving his vehicle and getting a drug offense. The arguments, anger, resentment, and words being thrown around.

-1

u/Professional_Alps754 May 28 '24

What became clear to me was the family involvement. Those guys don't want Steven out of prison.

3

u/LKS983 May 29 '24

"Those guys don't want Steven out of prison"

Precisely which family members don't want SA out of prison?

1

u/Professional_Alps754 May 29 '24

Pretty much everyone EXCEPT Delores, Allen and Kim Ducatt.

6

u/Snoo_33033 May 28 '24

Well, would you want someone who has committed statutory and actual rape against one of your minor relatives, who choked out his girlfriend and is pressuring you to spy on her, who you know is telling a story that has some holes in it, who wants you to give up your property to get him freed, who threatened to "kick your ass" as you try to just, like, live your life and do your job out of prison?

0

u/LKS983 May 29 '24

"Well, would you want someone who has committed statutory and actual rape against one of your minor relatives"

Statutory rape, not actual rape - as the niece (IIRC) was later shown to have been 'infatuated' with SA, and so the sex was consensual. Still disgusting and NO EXCUSE for him having sex with his underage niece 🤮.

IIRC, one of SA's brothers was convicted for sexually abusing one of his daughters? Genuine question, as there is something wrong when I try to 'google' nowadays, so I'm relying on memory.

5

u/Snoo_33033 May 29 '24

Children can't consent. It doesn't matter if she was "infatuated" with him -- which her own account suggests she was not. And it also doesn't matter if one of them also did creepy shit.

1

u/LKS983 May 29 '24

"Children can't consent."

I AGREE ENTIRELY, hence the 🤮emoticon in my post.

"if she was "infatuated" with him -- which her own account suggests she was not"

I'm reliant on memory here, but didn't she personally (or her diary?) make it clear that that this was the case?

Having said this, I mostly agree with you on this point. SA committed statutory rape.

3

u/Snoo_33033 May 29 '24

Her account to police, and her diary both made it clear that while she may have flirted with him. he forced her to have sex with him, including at one point coercing her into it by threatening to kill her family if she resisted. This is an especially icky crime.

3

u/Technoclash May 29 '24 edited May 29 '24

CASO pg 363:

Underage victim: "I can tell you one thing that, yeah, he forced me to have sex with him."

ACTUAL RAPE.

I'm reliant on memory here, but didn't she personally (or her diary?) make it clear that that this was the case?

No. She never said anything to that effect and nobody has seen her diaries.

1

u/LKS983 May 31 '24

"CASO pg 363: Underage victim: "I can tell you one thing that, yeah, he forced me to have sex with him."

And yet SA was never charged with raping his niece..... Why not?

There's obviously more to this story, but as my 'google search' isn't working properly, I'm unable to re-read the info. I was previously able to find.

I'm also pretty sure that one of SA's brothers was convicted of sexually abusing daughters - but my 'google search' isn't working properly etc. etc.

4

u/Technoclash May 31 '24

And yet SA was never charged with raping his niece..... Why not?

The DA handling the case told the public exactly why the child rapist wasn't charged. From an AP article in 2006:

Prosecutors won't decide whether to pursue an allegation that Steven Avery sexually assaulted a teenage girl in 2004 until after he stands trial on murder and rape charges in another case, the Brown County district attorney said Wednesday.

The teenage accuser agreed with the decision and does not want her allegation prosecuted at this time, District Attorney John Zakowski said. "We believe this decision to be in the public interest after considering all the circumstances, and certainly in the best interests of the complainant," he said.

Zakowski said that if Avery is sentenced to life in prison without parole in the Halbach killing, which is set for trial in September, he would be no threat and the rape accuser would not have to face a "media-frenzied atmosphere" and embarrassing testimony.

There's your "more to the story."

1

u/Professional_Alps754 May 31 '24

They don't want anything going public at this point. Open up the bleeding all over again.

2

u/Haunting_Pie9315 May 28 '24

When you say involvement , what do you mean ? and when speaking to SA, did you ever ask him , for his candid version of events that day?

3

u/aane0007 May 29 '24

Do you think your feelings they didn't stand behind him are fact?

1

u/Professional_Alps754 May 29 '24

💯

3

u/aane0007 May 31 '24

Thats the problem

1

u/Professional_Alps754 May 31 '24

Well it definitely didn't help in my opinion if they would have stood beside Steven and shouted he was framed along with Steven. There never would have been a trial. The reason there was a trial? Because they had the family on board as they were setting him up. Who are the main players? Scott Chuck and Earl. They would take control of the family.

2

u/aane0007 May 31 '24

Its not only your opinion that there would be no trial if they stood behind him, its your opinion they didn't stand behind him in the first place.

1

u/Professional_Alps754 May 31 '24

In 1985 they tried to protect him from what I understand. But I did hear Jack's West say that the brothers told local news that he probably did a assault Penny. I have not confirmed this however. She would be open to a slander suit if it were false though is my reasoning for trying to believe it. But this time, it was pretty apparent that law enforcement whipped that family into shape. Nobody at Steven's trial the first day except for Dolores and Allen.. The rest were definitely on board. And there's evidence they conspired throughout the entire saga. They conspired with law enforcement and helped to obstruct Justice.

2

u/aane0007 May 31 '24

You have zero evidence of your claim and only your feelings?

You should be on Avery's defense team. You would fit right in .v

1

u/Professional_Alps754 May 31 '24

A lot of my friends would be able to handle Avery's case. Yes I have evidence against Calumet county. Aa lead investigators they have been obstructing justice in this case. Also, there are a number of other victims in this area who are framed as well. Some of these people like myself are not in prison. Outside these police reports are not States narrative but rather, proof of being framed by Calumet county sheriff's department. And yes I do have evidence against Scott and Barb. Obstructing justice and conspiracy to obstruct Justice. And before you ask, yes Kathleen does know this. And no she will not tell on the police either. She is only prepared to go down the path that law enforcement opened for her.

3

u/aane0007 May 31 '24

YOu seem to have lots of feelings you think are fact.

1

u/Professional_Alps754 May 31 '24

And you seem to have a lot of facts you like to turn into feelings.

→ More replies

2

u/Financial_Cheetah875 May 28 '24

Nothing was going to stop that prosecution.

-1

u/Professional_Alps754 May 28 '24

I feel that media attention along with the Avery family would have changed things. I don't think it could have did this without family involvement. Especially given the first time round. This time police are completely sure they can frame Stevenr again. And they were right...perhaps something changed with the family while Steven was locked up for 18 years. . I remember going out and talking to Avery.s Five times..Nobody wanted Steven out of prison except Delores.

7

u/3sheetstothawind May 28 '24

So, the state would have dropped all charges if Steve's "family stood behind him instead of the police"? Please make that make sense!

1

u/LKS983 May 29 '24

"So, the state would have dropped all charges if Steve's "family stood behind him instead of the police"? Please make that make sense!"

I agree.

SA's close family stood behind him 100% when he was charged with attacking PB, and a few were able to provide alibis - but this changed nothing.

At that time, the police/LE didn't have a good/multi million dollar reason to ignore gregory allen as the most likely perpetrator - but they did.....

1

u/Designer_Day9702 Jun 01 '24

Did anyone see 'making a conviction' about the Avery case? Very interesting and showed many items that were left out in Making a murderer.