Defense lawyers in "Making a Murderer" react to series
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 янв 2016
- Dean Strang and Jerry Buting, Steven Avery's defense attorneys prominently featured in Netflix’s “Making a Murderer," join “CBS This Morning” for their first interview together since the documentary series premiered in December 2015. The 10-part series raises questions about whether Avery was wrongfully convicted of murder in 2007.
If I ever need a lawyer... I'm calling these guys.
+sam beckett so you can lose?
No i'm just kidding... They're the best
+The Nothingness They're the best defense lawyers in the state. I would give them my life savings if I was a defendant in a losing trial.
+SomeOneFromOFS who can really win against the people of the law?
Hope u have a few hundred thousand dollars lol
Quantum Leap why? Avery lost....
Would have been nice if you let Jerry finish at least one answer.
CBS gives these guys literally 4 minutes. Preposterous.
+theo2647 if you shaved jerrys head he would look like a golden eagle
I love this team, they are so perfect!!! So professional, caring about what they do and smart. God bless !
+Phillip Wilson you are right. But not every case is a won case, specially if the evidence has been altered. Then you got nothing to do. It's not the lawyers' fault. It was the corrupted authorities' fault.
DearMakeUpDiary and yet strang never has black and white said that Avery is innocent
@@phillipwilson4000 watching part 2, I guess you were right.
Here is what happened, Bobby and Scott killed Theresa to frame Steve. They put her body in the back of her car (where her blood was found) and drove to the quarry pit and burned her body in a barrel. They burned her because they saw Steve prepping for the bonfire behind his house. They took her remains and stored them in their backyard (bone fragments were found near their house too) until the next day because they needed to wait until the bonfire was done burning so they could bury/combine her bones and ashes among the bonfire ashes. They parked her car in the junkyard and covered it with branches and debris. November 3rd, Mike Halbach and Ryan Hilgas went to the Avery place to search for signs of Theresa. They began looking around the junkyard and found her car hidden. They immediately call their friend Officer Colborn to tell him. He arrives at the junkyard off duty in his own car and follows the boys to the car. He calls in to check the plates (because he doesn't have his radio on him off duty) and makes the statement of 99 toyota because he is looking at the car. He hangs up and is excited because it appears that Avery just killed this girl. Bye bye $36 Mil lawsuit. He tells the boys they will take it from here, but they need to make sure this case sticks (what with the past conviction being overturned). So the plan to "find" the car is hashed and the boys suggest that the lady search the junkyard and give her a "starting point." Colborn allows the lady to pass police barriers and she proceeds to find the car. The police plant the key, blood, and bullet. They force a confession from a family member (Brendan). The rest is history.
+Wally Douglas Couldn't have said it any better.
well said
reasonable theory. the crap that Colburn and Lenk got away with is unreal. Making up statements years later, finding the key on the 7th search, visiting the crime scene without signing in, calling in the license plate and vehicle type while claiming he was not looking at vehicle. they both should be in prison.
+Wally Douglas I like this "THEORY", lol.
+WedgeMahalo Don't forget how many times that they lied under oath Dean and Gerry proved it in court and they still weren't put in jail for perjury. The whole judicial system was screwed up and fixed in Wisconsin.
These guys were amazing.
What was so amazing about their defense? Garden variety cross examination which elicited no great surprises. There is not a shred of evidence that anyone from Manitowac County had anything to do with moving Theresa Hallbach's body or car. Steven Avery killed her and there was an abundance of evidence to support this with little or nothing on the other side which would create reasonable doubt.
The blood vial? clear evidence planted
I like Strang's answer to the question, "Are the two of you convinced that Avery is innocent?" where Strang says, "I'm not convinced that he's guilty." That's exactly where I am at this point and I think most rational people would feel the same way. I don't put it past Avery to do something like this, but I think the evidence isn't there and the fact that the police clearly tampered with and planted evidence should have produced a not-guilty verdict or mistrial. But then you have an ethical dilemma: if Avery did do this (and you believe he is capable of doing so), do you want to not send this POS murderer to prison and let him continue to be out there in society?..... But if you really don't know, you shouldn't convict a man. That's called a correct justice system. That lesson should have been learned from his first wrongful conviction back in the 80's...I honestly don't have a hard time believing that one of the weirdo brothers or other family members of Steven Avery did it....my biggest issue is that the police went straight for Avery instead of looking at some of his family members as potential suspects; they were so hellbent on getting back at Avery that they didn't look at all potential suspects and they even PLANTED EVIDENCE to get a conviction on Avery. That, to me, grants a mistrial. If Avery wouldn't have been found guilty, I wouldn't have been angry, I would have just been angry with the POS Manitowok County police department for the shit they pulled on Avery and for not investigating ALL potential suspects before immediately placing the blame on Steven Avery.
u sound like a fuckin moron, put it past a avery wtf , do u know him personally, u bias piece of shit!! lets talk about ur family
dylan technoGeek Calm down, Dylan Avery....
+GetSchanked An unpunished justice system is way worse than an innocent man with potenital to do one more crime and then to get behind bars. With an unpunished justice system everyone can get accused even if he isn't guilty so it is a farly easy ethnical question .
David Wilcox The op said that it is a moral dilemma but I said it isn't bc it would be worse if the justice system would be unpunished. In this way everyone could get punished without any guilt. I said that or more correct op stated that a men which has a high potential of doing something bad might also go in jail without anything done. I wanted to say in my first comment that he would go into jail anyway after his first crime but an unpunished system is not going to stop to be wrong therefore is going to be unrighteous to more people. So there shouldn't be an innocent men in jail ever.
+Malte Petersen petitions.whitehouse.gov//petition/initiate-federal-investigation-sheriffs-department-manitowoc-county-and-calumet-county-Wisconsin Please sign for Investigation into Manitowoc County Misconduct and share it. Thanks.
These 2 lawyers are absolutely brilliant.
Also found it quite amusing that simple minds starting singing don't you forget about me as the video ends!
+Mike Toby I couldnt stand brendan's first lawyer. I just wanted to punch my laptop screen. But I loved how Strang and his partner tackled what began as a really difficult trial
Guillermo Lopez Jr.
Thats his name? Even my own brain didn't want to remember his name. And that other asshole Ken Kratz - who sounds like a 7 yr old girl. In all seriousness, I hope that Steven Avery and Brendan can get another trial.
What did you find so brilliant about the lawyers ? Routine cross examination that did not at all undermine the states's case. I think these guys did a competent job, but hardly spectacular.
Mike Toby. Now 6 yrs later would u say that?? Brilliance could have proved SA innocence!!!
When they speak people listen
+howiboy That's because they're stating facts. The truth always seems louder.
+howiboy Or start playing The Breakfast Club theme song.
when i speak , no one listens
broh can we just have these two for presidnet. dean for president and the other guy for vicepresident
Da fuck are they playing that breakfast club shit at the end?
+tamicha1 nigga watch yo language
+tamicha1 I think its just a daytime or morning tv show 'play off' music, letting everyone know the commercial break is coming. (Like at awards ceremony's they cue music to cut off speeches)
+tamicha1 that was some stupid BS selecting that song
Haha I was thinking the same thing!!
+tamicha1 Yes, it's the final song of the movie.
Ten years and they still look very handsome. Brilliant men.
Brenda Carter brilliant how? If they were truly brilliant, they would of won
I love Dean, he's an amazing lawyer and a great man but I've noticed Jerry is better at explaining things to others, particularly about the "missing info" in the doc.
+HB S Jerry is brilliant and analytical. Dean is more feeling oriented. Both which are great traits. They make a great team
They tried and their hearts were in it but they missed a lot, Katherine Zellner has found a lot more that could have been done ✔️
@@MX-COLook up Ken Kratz and it will tell you everything you need to know. These two are genuine honest public servants. Kratz is a proven lying narcissistic sexual predator who was forced to resign shortly after this case and, following his appeals…has subsequently relinquished his license to practice law. He is quite simply a lying pervert.
How on Earth a car key does not have the owner's DNA?! How?!
scrubbed lol
Because that key was never used by TH, as it was a "valet key," and left at her house, which was quickly taken over by her ex boyfriend, Ryan Hilagas, after her "disappearance." Jerry and Dean are now very careful, when speaking about the SA case they lost, to not suggest that either of them suspect the county(ies), let alone, the entire State DOJ of Wisconsin is involved in the immense injustice done to Avery and his family since 1985. They obviously learned, from the 2007 case proceedings that bringing the truth to the people of the jury and the judge of Manitowoc County court rooms only brings SA, again, closer into the crosshairs of that completely corrupt State's officers of the court.
Better call Saul my ass. I'm calling these mofos
These guys are so legit the definition of street smart and book smart"
These two guys are damn genius. Respect .Sorry Sir! You guys didn't win cause the verdict was done before the trial. You don't have to a Sherlock Holmes to figure our that the crime scene was set up. Key not in a safe place, Covering the Rav4 with woods & Branches ( That's what they found nearby. His Nephew was added just to spice up the case with Rap(e). If he wanted he could have disappeared that kinda Five Suv's & corpses easily.
here's the difference between these men and the Wisconsin justice mob: these men will admit they cannot rule out the possibility of Avery being guilty and always spoke in an objective and professional manner, whereas Kratz and his corrupt crew always stated 'maybes' and 'he saids' as facts in such a subjective way. these two men clearly genuinely seek truth, whereas Kratz'n crew (as stated in the documentary) only ever sought a conviction. clearly.
2 of the best defense lawyers i've ever seen, very intelligent
Is that a wedding ring I see on Dean Strang's hand?! 😭😭😭
+Danielle Rawson Yes, dean got married to jerry, they love each other very much
+Tom jackson ha you caught me of guard with that one.
denis brennan It's true, they even have their own sex tape, there are rumours that they are making a reality tv show as well.
ha brilliant m9
+Tom jackson Yep. The sex tape is called Strangle My Butting.
When I first saw Buting in the documentary I said, "hey that guy looks like Anthony Mason from CBS". Now look at them face to face 😂
regardless of the outcome, these 2 lawyers are brilliant and really did their job...
A patrol officer from Calumet named William Tyson was assigned teams with Lenk and Colburn the very first day they searched Avery's trailer. The same Patrol officer had Avery's buccal swab on Nov 9th. He is also the same person that swabbed the hood latch. Seems to me like DNA could have been planted from the buccal swab he had. It wouldn't be hard at all. Technically he could have used it for her key too. Key found on 8th and we don't know the actual date the key was sent to the crime lab. If it wasn't sent until after the 9th Tyson could have transferred Avery's DNA to the key as well. I got all this info by reading Dassey's trial. I'm surprised Strang and Buting didn't put this vital info together.
foghaze Where did you read the documents/transcripts of the trial, please?
Innocent
Strang really reminded me of Ed Norton's character in 'The People Vs Larry Flint' (check it out, he's in very good form in that movie). But whilst that character is portrayed by an exceptional actor, these guys are the real deal. Before watching this documentary I wrongly assumed that defence lawyers were mainly assholes who bent the law to fit with their own financial motivations and boost their own reputations, but can now see what these guys are often up against. Strang and Buting displayed the highest measure of integrity and professionalism in this case, and I was left scratching my head afterwards as to how exactly the jury were not convinced by these guys.
So he called her to make sure she wasn't gonna be early again like she was last time when he was in the shower. She didn't answer his call, so he tried again using #67. That seems like a pretty reasonable answer to me. He did work at a salvage yard, and probably got a lil dirty. Can you blame him one for wanting to be cleaned up when an attractive girl was coming by?
+dave doe Yea, that seems logical . When someone doesn't answer me I sometimes try #67 just to see if they will pick up if they don't know who it is.
+dave doe Wow you people are really dense, I don't know what the love affair is for this guy, but let's assume your defending him because you dont want to see an innocent go down for a crime he didn't commit, which is admirable. But let me help you with the facts here. The first call to her, not the 2nd, not the 3rd...the FIRST CALL, was sent using *67 that was made at 2:20, the next call was made, again using *67 at 2:31, and then a final call at 4:45 NOT using the *67, so let me ask you, what sounds more plausible, he killed her and wanted create a phone sequence to give the impression that she'd never shown up, or he was calling just in case she was going to be early and he wanted to be prepared this time so as not to be taken off guard. Dude, look at the facts and then try to piece together logical conclusions, if you do, you'll realize ............He murdered her.
unite4peace88
Maybe the last call was not *67 bc he had just talked to her an hour before and she said for him to call her back.
+Kacey 1st of all where did you get that from? This isn't like gonna be like your receipt comment, is it,... you know some bullshit made up statement, pulled out of your ass just to find some way to defend your boyfriend Steve Avery?, because I have never heard anything close to that before, but let's assume for a second it's true. That would mean there was a magical call, not shown on the phone records at about 3:45. The problem with that is, it doesn't exist. There was not call an hour before the last call. 3 calls, and only 3 calls. One very, very important thing you have to consider is IF steve avery didn't kill her then why pretend in the 1st interview view that you hardly know who she is. Do you know her name?...(long pause) Teresa or something...Really! Really Steve. Trying to convey an impression that you hardly know someone, when the evidence proves the opposite is true, almost certainly is a guilty person trying to cover his tracks.
+Kacey Fair enough!, phone calls aren't evidence, I'd agree with that, however they can be used as proof that someone is not being truthful about something, like how well they know a person. But if evidence is what you want then let's talk really quick about the 1 piece of evidence that cant be explained away by saying that the police were involved in framing. The jeans Brendan Dassey was wearing, the one's he washed THAT NIGHT, the ones he wore while helping Steve Avery clean the garage. If I pulled my pants down a bit, climbed on top of some defenseless woman, and had sex with her, mainly because I wanted to know what if felt like to have sex, the 1st thing I would do to cover my tracks is to wash those pants. Get her smell off of them, and get the whole experience out of my mind. Actions my dear, speak louder and more clearly than words.
Buting fans stand up and represent!
I haven't heard anywhere near the dialogue that is deserved when discussing alternative suspects....What about the two hunters that (alibied themselves) in the direct VICINITY when the crime supposedly happened?
And Edwards serial killer who lived not that far away. Google him. Crazy.
+1_fineskylark Sometimes the most obvious answer is the right answer,...you know the one that points to the last person she saw that day actually did in fact murder her. The one thing no one ever talks about is how in the hell is it possible that not a single person saw this woman after she drove onto the Avery property. The reason is a simple one, Steve Avery killed her. FACTS submitted into evidence, that were not challenged or refuted by his defense team show that Steve Avery called Auto Trader, (using as Alias -) and requested and I quote "make sure you send the girl you sent last time". He even called her cell phone 3 times from his home phone. Now let ask you 2 very simple questions. 1. Where or how did he get her phone number? ...2. Why would he use a fake name when calling to arrange for the photo session?.
+unite4peace88 - the mysterious 'alias' you speak of was his sister's name because SHE WAS SELLING THE CAR, NOT HIM. With ALL the evidence presented, there is no obvious here. Steven was guilty before the tainted jury "reached" their verdict because a few select officials made it so.
+unite4peace88 ive actually asked many attorneys on this case, and an FBI special agent, and they all say the whole case is shady at best. so you do the math, too much circumstantial, to much bias, motives, bad attorney ethics, pseudoscience tests for blood, i could on and on and youre still left with an assumption of that "stephen avery Last saw Teresa, therfor he killed her", how many other suspects were there?? brother please dont be so naive to think this is a clear cut and dry case. at the very least, if he was or is guilty , he still should of have beeen tried fairly. ...so we know oj killed his wife, but he gets off, so we dont know for sure stephen killed teresa, yet hes convicted..... weird ...
+1_fineskylark Yes, your right about that, he did use his sisters name, however doesn't it really matter? I mean everything points to the fact that he wanted to get that girl there. If he's so innocent why didn't he let Barb handle things after she arrived, why didn't he just return to work like he usually would do?, I man who shows up in a towel when a woman is knowingly coming by is insinuating something, she didn't at all strike me as the type who'd go for a Steve Avery type. So what was her reaction when that happened? did it piss him off? Did you he have designs on making her pay for the way she reacted? These are valid questions, and all the evidence points to him getting pissed at her, perhaps thinking she thought she was better than he was, in any case he killed her and has been found guilty. The framing aspect is all coincidental a rigged theory like the O.J. Simpson, framing theory it's what defense teams have to use to counter DNA left by their client, don't believe the hype
These are my kind of heartthrobs.
As I'm watching the documentary, I can't help but notice how wise, professional and caring these two man are.
They gave them all trying to protect Steven, find ANY evidence for his innocence and actually believing him (which is so important).
These guys had their hands tied and Wesconsin was gonna win this at any cost! Thanks fellas for bringing awarness
these guys are humble,honest dedicated lawyers who do their job with passion, they have my admiration beyong a reasonable doubt.
These guys are truly remarkable. True representatives of common sense, which was often lacking among many presented in "Making a Murderer."
Did they really play don't you forget about me at the end omfg 😂
these guys are awesome even when they lose
It's true you can't rule him out of being guilty after watching the series but there's so much doubt there and strange goings on in the police department which to me looked obvious that they were trying to frame him but maybe they had nothing to prove he was guilty. Either way after watching I'm amazed that they could come to a verdict of guilty with what must have been so much doubt in there mind after enduring the trial especially as at the beginning of deliberations 7 had sided with the defence team. You can't put someone in prison for life on a maybe.
You guys did a wonderful job during this trial. I’ve never seen a better pair work as hard as you did. It’s just a shame that you were up against an entire corrupt team on the other side. Leader, Kratz always rubbed me the wrong way.. like a creep lurking in a dark alley or something like that... UGH
Kratz said on TV it was not possible for the key to have been planted in SA's bedroom, because the key lanyard was found in TH's locked car. If you think about it, it's completely impossible for the planter to have used the key to open the car, detached the key from the lanyard, placed the lanyard in the car, used the key to lock the car, then put the key in SA's bedroom. This is how we can know SA is innocent - because the prosecutor is forced to talk crap to defend the conviction.
Love these guys!
Also weird they only gave 4:30 for this segment. Other guest usually get up to 7-8 minutes.
Also.. by the way.. if that EDTA tube was not shaken once drawn, it would be absent the EDTA. It’s at the bottom of the tube and many forget to shake the tube before storing.
"I'm not at all convinced of his guilt." So this is the strongest statement one of Avery's defense attorneys can make in support of Avery? This is clever attorney speak and is quite telling. I get the impression this attorney believes Avery did commit the crime but is saying he has serious doubts the state met its burden in obtaining a guilty verdict, given the possibility of police misconduct in the case. His statement may sound like he is saying he is not convinced Avery did the crime, but is really making a statement about guilt in the legal sense of the word.
protamine4 obviously but most here won't get that. he knows mam is a fabrication
This is patently true. If you asked Strang and Buting to be blunt about the likelihood of Avery’s guilt, I bet they’d be over 90% sure of it and that’s a conservative estimate!
When was the photograph of the blood in the car taken? After or before the police had access to SA and would know he had a cut on the right finger?
Stellar Defense Team!
Neither of the key pieces of evidence they mention were left out of the series at all. They were specifically mentioned in the doc. Where do people get this?
I think the lawyers made a serious error: They should of taken on Brandon's case too. That way all this Len Kachinsky shit would never of happened. And then once they had taken on Brendan, they could get child psychologists in to confirm that the the boy was a simpleton who was easily led by authority and words were put into his mouth. If this was done I think it would have been a very hard case for the State to have been successful (for both Brendan and Steven)
The power of the editing room.
did you see the blank stare on the lawyer that looks like Hawkeye Pierce's face when they were asked if they think he did it.
I really like these 2 guys!
How much more blood can they test if they already tested it 3 times during the trial?
I think it was Bobby Dassey and Scott Tadych. They both gave alibis for each other. Steven Avery's lawyers tried to make it look like the cops planted all the evidence. I think they did plant some, however it wasn't just the cops who had access to the garage that they claimed SA killed Teresa Hallbach in. Bobby Dassey, and Scott had four months to gather their shell casings and bullet fragments and plant them into the garage as well. Kathleen Zellner, SA new lawyer has been investigating this case and has said that the evidence points to an obvious alternate killer.
I loveeeee these two
They are a good lawyers.. i love your team
The perfect team, if there was ever one.
I love these guys
I've always wondered How the Car was found on the 5th of November (Locked)
Is processed on the 6th of November (unlocked) the processed says its unlocked when he arrives.
But the key isn't found until November 8th
Who unlocked it and when?
I think the person that unlocked it also planted the blood and then leaves it unlocked and than plants the Key.
Also Kratz was personally there on November 5th!
And Ryan has a lot of questionable actions. There are videos about it.
But he has he voice-mail password. It is known that voice-mails are deleted.
He also in his own phone records has a 17 hour gap in phone use, no calls or texts for 17 hours the day she goes missing, which is very unusual for him, he was a heavy phone user texted etc.
He drew the lady a map that finds the car.
He also claims her car already had damage, nobody else can confirm that.
I think he is at the very least involved in helping frame Steven.
He called he because she was supposed to meet him to take photos for the mag, could be that she was running late and he wanted to know when she'd arrive, done the same myself. And the 'sweat' under the hood of her car, it's quite plausible that since he owned a car wrecking yard that she'd asked him to take a look at something in her engine that was bothering her, put water, oil or anything etc...
Whatever you believe, I'm 90% sure he's innocent & 10% of me thinks he might have done it - the police f*cked up so bad that I think we'll never know for sure but he shouldn't be in prison - the evidence isn't concrete enough- they could do that to any of us (a scary thought).
In my opinion he had no motive, he got into a bit of trouble early in life but had no history that would point towards this kind of crime, and it's a well known fact that MOST murders are perpetrated by people well known to the victim. It was probably her ex-boyfriend or even Steven Avery's brother-in-law who did have a history of being violent towards women.
What u think?
these guys are literally top 5 lawyers in the country. no question.
Jay nah
Victor Flores true
MAD world
He and his nephew were railroaded. If this can happen while being recorded, anything can happen and none of us are safe.
"they were found (bones)... a part of them in a burn barrel behind the Bobby Dassey Residence"
Hmm... I am the only one that think its weird that he mentions Bobby, not Brendan, The Janda/Tadych residence?
da o.g's in the building
Truly heroes.
What's odd is they didn't use luminol in the trailer and shop, maybe someone didn't want to know what happened at the so called crime scene.
Love these lawyers they know what to say! And never get defensive! I’m on there side!
These guys are basically heros.
Great representation here .
I do hope some new evidence comes forward. Attorney Strang and Buting, I want to thank you both for your steadfast faith in Steven Avery.
he called and made the appointments to her phone right! so go back to the episode when they question the brother and boyfriend about the messages that were FULL on her inbox!! they proved that there may have been 1 or more messages deleted from her phone that day and her brother and boyfriend knew the passwords. surely that is a lead towards somthing???
these guys are so iconic
He’s so guilty … however looks like these town lawyer don’t want to assume it !
Someone should retest the EDTA blood sample test carried out by FBI. So much fishiness about that test. I'm not on Steve's side. But the whole FBI involvement, sudden test results sounds so desperate attempts to produce false evidence against him.
Also I'm so stunned that there were only one suspect in this case, not the ex bf, not his brother not Bobby were suspects even when their alibi were fishy. It's ridiculous how the state stick to looking into only one guy.
Saul Goodman and David Wallace make for two great defense lawyers.
Reminds me of the Paradise Lost debacle.
+RobinHood84 I read the case files from the West Memphis 3 trial after seeing the documentaries and its pretty obvious that they were guilty as charged. Of course, after seeing the films you immediately feel like they were innocent but that is far from the truth.
I love those guys
(Note: Maybe I am not the first one to come up with the following suggestions, but regarding the huge cruelty of Steven Avery’s case, one could care less, so I am simply posting it on various threads, hoping not to be handled as spam):
I am honestly worried. If you live in a system, where several attorneys proved that even the Kennedy assassinations had some corrupt thing going on, and to this day the public is still served the official crap story, one can assume, that Steven Avery’s release will always be blocked and suppressed by this very system: How often were Steven’s appeals and applications for retrial dismissed? Every time, until he had no more right (!) to claim further more; so he began working on his case by himself. This system is unjust and always will be, unless those who believe in Steven’s innocence, try to bring this case to the attention of those, who may be really able - well, even if they weren’t able to change the whole injustice of the system, they definitely could help those brave and true lawyers who are stuck inside this cursed system but yet devotedly stick to Steven Avery - to help. I am talking about some candidates who are currently running for the presidency of the United States. And I’d like to clear things up first: I am living in Germany (some capable internet users certainly could figure that out and constrain easily), so I have no interest in any political discussions regarding those candidates. But what I do have interest in, is focusing on Steven Avery’s case and, generally, in justice and human rights. Having this said, I’m naturally suggesting Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump (whoever thinks the system would change under Hillary Clinton is not well informed - and if President Obama refused to pardon Steven Avery why would Hillary Clinton do so? She would just come up with other excuses, why she couldn't do that; this is common sense. I am not saying, the system would change under Donald Trump, but he is factually an independent candidate and therefore most likey to resist lobbying). Since Donald Trump already came up with a similar issue (in february he stated that he would reveal documents dealing with the - also to this day still unsolved, due to an unjust system - circumstances of the terror attacks on 9/11), he could be even more helpful. It is also very important to realize, that the more realistic Steven Avery’s release may get, the more aggressively the prosecution will try to put things in their favour. Again, common sense: If Steven could have get 36 million dollars after his first release, what number could that possibly be the second time (plus Brendan Dassey’s case), additionally to the exposure of a bunch of people in high positions. Always follow the money; who benefits from something, who has what sort of things to lose, and what are people in high positions capable of doing and how far would they possibly go (and, as far as I’m concerned, I have been convinced that nowadays there are literally no more boundaries). Of course, I am aware of the fact, that any of such actions suggested above could increase Donald Trump’s (already alarmingly high) chance of experiencing similar troubles as the Kennedys did back then; and I naturally don’t wish this to happen neither to him, nor to the world, nor to common sense.
I hope this idea is helpful, and if so, will be spread quickly. (Note again: sorry if this idea has already been discussed.)
EDTA needs to be tested
+Barbara Neri As i pointed out above, one expert in EDTA testing has already stated that you must verify your results. In other words, the lab tech who tested the vial of EDTA should have made two tests instead of one to see if she received the same positive result because there's less than 1% of EDTA in one vial of blood. The lab tech that did the result only ran one test, which came back positive, but if she should have ran two tests. If both come back positive, then fine, it's a genuine positive result, back if one test comes back positive and the other negative, then the overall sample is tainted and cannot be used as evidence.
Michael SB why would she do it right if she has an agenda?
Barbara Neri nah that would prove he did it, and you guys don't want that do you
My instincts tell me that Steve is not guilty beyond reasonable doubt. That he has been framed. Brendan was failed in so many ways and on so many levels. He was manipulated heavily. My heart goes out to him the most. These poor men. Their system is corrupt. It was an opportunistic cop or higher up I believe who arranged all that evidence against Steven. It was an attempt to save on having to pay him compensation and to reruin Steven's rep. I hope they both get out. I'm not a scientist but I reckon they should've got some blood out of that test tube, wiped it on the same dash board and compared them..if they matched, and a live sample from the now Steve, didn't match either the original or the experiment (referring to the chemicals in the tube), then that proves the bloods from the test tube..right?
I'm hoping to ask one or both of these attorneys how they felt about the way the judge in this case tended to decide against them 90% of the time. I felt like the deck was stacked, rigged, and then someone from the prosecutor's office was dealing from the bottom.
What GOOD could come of this? Well, maybe it has opened the minds and the eyes of a few American citizens who've always believed the police were there to Protect Them. Not quite as easy to believe if you watch this story and admit to yourself that something very ugly and untrustworthy often wear uniforms of blue.
These 2 cats need to work together all the time
Please convey this messsage to the marvellous laywers of the poor "human being" on the Netflix séries Making a Murderer: "They are both laywers the most courageous, intelligent and human persons on Earth. They both make-up a better world for us to Live. Praised be our Lord! Congratulations. You both are magnific!
My question to them would be this. Why are you not convinced of his innocence? Is there some sort of disturbing sense from knowing him so well, being with him for so long etc that he is capable of such a crime? This is a key question I have for these guys? They are intelligent men. They know everything there is possible to know of this whole saga. For them to think there is a chance he is guilty, there must be something there. Something perhaps they have not yet shared with the public. Of course, this does not mean he should be convicted but it would definitely help ease any sort of sorrow or remorse the public should have towards Steven and the Avery family.
+Darren Ryan He could be guilty, but there was so much bs with the police dept. that should've created some doubt in the jury to at least cause a mistrial. I think thats what he meant.
Personally I don't think that there is much that would cause doubt and I do not think that there is anything that they know that we don't that causes them doubt. However in my opinion when you hear Dean Strang in different interviews and even in the Documentary he has been very clear that as a lawyer in an imperfect justice system you can never be 100% sure of someone's innocence or guilt. Rather the goal is to come as close to finding the truth as possible. There is a reason that the law mentions "Reasonable Doubt" that is because no matter what, as humans we will always have a small amount of doubt. So it is normal to have some doubt in all court cases, however you have to ask whether the doubt you have is reasonable or not. So basically Dean Strange is saying that he has a small amount of doubt that Steven is innocent, but he has far greater doubts that Steven is guilty.
+Darren Ryan I think it's simply because they were so hell bent on convicting Steven they didn't look at any other possible suspects or any evidence that would've pointed to someone other than Steven. I believe if it was an unbiased investigation we would know for sure who killed Teresa by now but there are so many holes. When there's no solid proof who killed Teresa, it essentially could've been anyone who lived on the Avery property.
+Darren Ryan You misunderstand the way they think. It's not that they know things that suggests to them he did it, they just simply don't know enough to come to any conclusion of innocence. It's one thing to argue against or for a proof of guilt and another to argue for definite innocence. Unless for example they've been there at the scene of the crime or with Avery and have no reason to doubt their memory, it would be irrational to say they believe he's innocent.
+HB S I would start by looking at her sketchy ex- boyfriend and creeper brother.
Squad💯
hahaha they start playing 'dont you forget about me' when talking about a guy who has been left in jail
I don't want to get old and watch my face slowly turn into the face of a Basset hound
Hmm.. burn pit behind the Bobby Dassey residence. And today Kathleen Zellner, Stevens current attorney, filed and released today a form that states a witness saw Bobby Dassey moving Theresa's vehicle
Don't you Forget about me?!? Is that a sick joke?
Strang and Buting = Mark Jackson
Zellner = Steve Kerr
If you talk motive, the police had every reason in the world to frame Avery. Over 300 million reasons to commit murder. Avery had no motive. Over 300 million reasons not to commit murder. The police framed Avery once and were good at it and Avery was good at being the victim.
Once the Police have decided who is guilty, they will do anything to secure a conviction, as will the prosecuters. Any subsequent evidence that would lead to doubt is suppressed, dirty tricks are played in the media, additional 'evidence' is planted, jailhouse snitches are paid off, and the innocent are duly convicted. It is estimated that there are 120,000 innocent people in US prisons, mostly African Americans and other minorities.
The final tally for lethal shootings by police in 2015 was 1,134, there are no figures for extra judicial killings by police death squads. This is the state of justice in America, the reason she wears a blindfold, is to hide her tears.
If prison had changed Avery into a killer, surely he would have killed one of the people who had him locked up for 18 years.
From what was shown in the documentary (I am only starting to scratch the surface as to what wasn't shown), I don't see any amount of evidence that points to him 100% of being guilty. Then again, I don't see any amount of evidence that points to him 100% of being NOT guilty either, and I think that's the problem. To me, this case is a flip to what we have always been told "Innocent until proven guilty." I think Steven Avery very much was "Guilty until proven innocent." So these guys had a monumental task of trying to prove he didn't do it. But at the same time, again based off the documentary, the prosecution spent less time trying to prove his guilt, and more time trying to prove that the evidence wasn't planted. And you could start a drinking game with every time a prosecution witness said "Um", "Uh", "I'm not sure", "I don't recall", etc etc.
there is some pretty compelling evidence that was left out if you ask me.
dna, avery making dodgy phone calls to halbach, previous encounters....halbach complained about avery's behaviour previously.
Manitowoc county sheriff will clean the car after hearing the last part of this video...
Free Avery !!!!! Come on Wisconsin do what right and give that mannn his Freedom
Butang 2016
Lord make justice
I love that answer “ I’m not convinced he’s guilty” and that it’s not ok to convict on maybes that’s how I feel from what I watched everything against Steven avery just seemed so odd never got the feeling that this guy has done it for sure
Who, with any sense whatsoever, leaves a murdered woman's car key on their bedroom floor. Looks planted af
Check out a PETITION on the whitehouse site (until Feb 6)
Does someone think that Dean Strang looks like Bernard Rubble?
Avery's jury had to of been one of the worst juries ever assembled. They obviously didnt understand reasonable doubt.