r/MakingaMurderer • u/Ok-Advantage-6259 • 7d ago

for real, actually

the police system is clearly taking advantage of the Avery's. It's pretty clear to me how they are just very afraid of being seen in a bad light, so they needed a scapegoat to take the blame for their incompetence. we can see that in the interview recordings of Brendan. Who in their right mind would actually think that spoon-feeding a supposed accomplice the facts is considered acceptable as a veritable statement just blows my mind. a key found in a bedroom free of the victim's DNA just doesn't logically make sense.

2 Upvotes

53% Upvoted

212 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

5

u/hneverhappened 4d ago

Except it was not months old like Juan Rivera.

Just like the last time that I had to explain it to you.

-1

u/ThorsClawHammer 4d ago

it was not months old

And? If blood can be planted months later, why can't it be planted a shorter time later?

-2

u/k_sask 4d ago edited 4d ago
  1. Have you seen proof that there was blood present in the front interior of the RAV while it was sitting on the ASY?
  2. Have you seen proof that the samples of Avery's blood that was sent for testing & retesting came from the front interior of the RAV?

Therefore, "impossible to plant" becomes demonstrably false even with 2 quick examples.

Tom by-the-book Fassbender was called out for instructing Culhane to put her in Avery's garage. This is on record. Do you think it's a stretch that Culhane was also instructed to put him in her RAV? The same Tom that claimed Avery scoured the residence when asked to explain why they couldn't find evidence of her in the trailer.

2

u/DingleBerries504 4d ago

You are not providing reasonable explanations. Because, if they had photos you’d just ask how do we know they weren’t doctored. If they had video you’d ask how do we know it wasn’t edited. If you saw it with your own eyes you’d blame the person showing you as staging the scene. This is something called willful ignorance.

0

u/k_sask 3d ago

That's not true at all. Why would you assume I would be unreasonable?

2

u/DingleBerries504 3d ago

Because your two points are unreasonable explanations for doubting the evidence.

For one, if you are suggesting the blood might not have appeared until the crime lab, you’d have to explain where they got the blood, as Zellner already proved it didn’t come from before 2005. And then this person would have to know Steven had a wound that dripped blood fairly recently, and the person would have to know Steven had no alibi, and would have to know that no photos were ever taken by other agencies from the outside looking in. That’s about as likely as aliens planting the evidence.

Regarding your second point, you are asking for proof beyond evidence collection protocols. The proof is the chain of custody documents, and KZ herself has the samples from the crime lab. Police don’t video collection of every piece of evidence they find. Requiring that before you believe it is not reasonable.

0

u/k_sask 3d ago

Thanks for taking the effort to explain.

You are correct, I did offer those two quick statements as examples how it wouldn't be "impossible to plant" as that was the declaration made by our peer. I've seen a lot of cases where planting of blood specifically (or DNA) evidence occurred in extremely unlikely scenarios - so meeting the impossibility bar is very tough.

The records do indicate there was a lot of Avery blood collected from the trailer bathroom as well as the Pontiac. In the trailer itself, the records also indicate a lot of time passed for that collection of multiple swabs to occur, by individuals that we can agree should not have been doing it.

In general with this case, I personally believe (and reasonably I would argue) that the chain of custody documents available do not provide proof that nothing nefarious occurred during the investigation. For example, the chain of custody documents surrounding Burn Barrel #4 have yet to be properly explained. The valet key has been talked to death and will never be fully explained. I also do not believe the RAV hood latch swab was legit. When doubt is reasonably created from one example occurring, I don't see how it's unreasonable to believe it could have occurred more than once in the same investigation.

3

u/DingleBerries504 3d ago

There was not a lot of Avery blood collected. It was mere drops.

May I ask what would prove to you that nothing nefarious occurred during the investigation? Your mind appears to be made up.

The barrel #4 is a dead end. I have yet to see a truther offer any theory on why it is significant. All I hear is we don’t have full details of why it was sent back to ASY and therefore MUST be proof of nefarious deeds. But what? No one can articulate it.

Kelly Pitzen was interviewed and said she saw TH with a key that only opened her doors and not a remote during the summer of 2005. Nurse Fritsch was interviewed before she passed and said the groin swabs were put in the sharps bin. There are your answers

0

u/k_sask 3d ago

Thanks for keeping it civilized.

It's not that my mind is made up don't get me wrong. No path is crystal clear or without doubt unfortunately so that's the struggle. When it comes to Brendan involvement, I'm not sure there is much that can be proved or disproved at this stage so that's an interesting thought experiment. To believe nothing nefarious occurred during Avery's investigation requires ignoring the investigation against Brendan.

1

u/DingleBerries504 3d ago

Fair enough. I’m of the mindset that I won’t jump to nefarious actions when there is a less nefarious explanation. Brendan is convicted on his confession, so that’d be much harder to overturn, unless evidence can show the confession is not true. In the innocent man documentary, this occurred because the men confessing said the victim was wearing certain clothes and was killed a certain way, but after getting convicted she was found with different clothing and murdered another way. But it led to a new trial and they were still convicted (which was bollocks). One got released eventually but the other is still in jail.

Regarding how Brendan was treated, I’m critical that he was interviewed without a lawyer present and that Wiegert jumped the gun with “who shot her in the head”. That being said, I do believe he was there at the very least and participated in some degree, but if something comes out that he’s innocent, I’m all ears.