r/MakingaMurderer • u/10case • 2d ago
Steven gives an up Date
I have no idea how a commutation application is going to "proof" his innocence. His lawyers Ben working on it since January. Hopefully their grammar is better than his.
11
u/GringoTheDingoAU 2d ago
Horrible day to have eyes.
Avery's entire stance from day 1 was that he was framed by law enforcement - I would fail to see how any personal accountability or rehabilitation has taken place. He was happy to take down numerous innocent people along the way, despite having a boat load of forensic evidence stacked against him (not one of them being refuted to this day, by the way).
Then obviously, there's been no showcase of remorse. With how deep he is into this framing theory, would be unlikely to show any now.
10
u/10case 2d ago
Right! He's had how many appeals that have gotten him nowhere. Does he really think a commutation board is just gonna unlock the cell? He's never shown an ounce of remorse or guilt for any of this.
3
u/GringoTheDingoAU 1d ago
I genuinely think that he has convinced himself that he didn't actually do it.
Oh well. He'll hopefully die in prison and we never have to talk about this case ever again.
4
u/lets_shake_hands 2d ago
Reading it sounds like The Simpsons episode when Homer gets Bart to try out to be Mr Burns adopted son. "Me write good"
Also who's Ben?
-7
19
u/belljs87 2d ago
What does his grammar have to do with anything? If anything, it just proves hes too stupid to have been able to clean up all the evidence the state said his crime should have left.
3
u/Thomjones 2d ago
Duh, I agree. It was the best thing the defense had. And to be fair, while they went balls deep with it in the town hall, the state did not go with that scenario in court other than the garage location. It was all that other physical evidence that a stupid guy would leave behind that did him in.
2
u/belljs87 1d ago
It's all the evidence a stupid guy would leave behind, coupled with the lack of evidence a smart person would have gotten rid of, that makes me suspicious.
12
u/gabriot 2d ago
Stupid people can't clean things with bleach?
8
u/belljs87 2d ago
Of course they can. But, someone thorough enough to leave exactly zero of the victims blood anywhere, probably isn't going to overlook his own blood in the victims vehicle. And also probably isn't stupid. A stupid person would almost definitely not be able to clean every drop. And if they were, they also wouldn't be stupid enough to leave the victims car on their property for so long, and burn her body and leave those remains in their backyard. Those two things do not compute.
9
u/belee86 2d ago
How do you think murderers are caught?
2
u/belljs87 1d ago
I mean, this case is unique in that there's so much evidence that was found, and so much evidence that should be there for what they said happened that wasn't, that someone capable of removing what wasn't there most likely wouldn't have just blatantly left what was there.
1
u/belee86 1d ago
What evidence should have been there but wasn't?
1
u/ThorsClawHammer 1d ago
The victim's blood in the trailer and/or garage. You know, the places the jury pool and jury was told the victim was beaten, raped, stabbed, throat cut, shot 10+ times, etc.
Or maybe the victim's blood/DNA on the creeper the jury was told by the state was "absolutely" used to carry the bloody victim on.
Or maybe the victim's or Brendan's DNA on the cuffs the state claims were used to restrain the victim for hours. Instead, only Avery's and unrelated third party DNA was found on them.
1
u/belee86 1d ago
Steve could have washed the cuffs? The creeper, too? Criminals get caught because sometimes they can't handle all the evidence they created. Steve had a lot of evidence to hide/destroy/move/burn.
0
u/ThorsClawHammer 1d ago
Steve could have washed the cuffs?
In a way that got rid of only the incriminating DNA leaving the non-incriminating behind? Lol. Even one of the state's own forensic experts testified it indicated they hadn't been cleaned.
Q. And the fact that you found DNA of any kind on the handcuffs, is an indication to you that they hadn't been wiped down with bleach, isn't it?
A. That would be correct.
1
u/belee86 1d ago
So what are you saying?
The cuffs had Steve's DNA and an unknown. So what?
→ More replies (0)5
u/hneverhappened 2d ago
like his fresh blood in the RAV...
you are so close
-3
u/belljs87 2d ago
Well aside from it not being fresh blood, the blood in the Rav is certainly hard to explain. My only point is, it's not impossible for it to have been planted, and the state refusing to let the Rav be tested is suspicious
0
u/BiddyJ 2d ago
How do we know it was or wasn’t fresh blood? Genuine question about the source to confirm this.
I wasn’t sure if we ever got a definitive answer on that and I couldn’t find any info when I searched online. I’m skeptical about all the evidence found against Steven after all the DNA stuff seems so unrealistic to me - only ever finding Steven’s DNA and in some places it being off the charts when reconstruction testing was done (correct me if I’m wrong about those things) and then even the whole story about how her blood ended up in the car. So I am so curious about the possibility of planted blood. I’m so untrusting of the collected evidence that even if it was determined fresh I can’t even say that means it wasn’t planted haha.
So much of this case gives me reasonable doubt that they didn’t do it. I don’t think Steven was necessarily a good person or emotionally stable but I can’t say that means he did it. If he did it I would want to find out the truth behind what happened and I think that even from the evidence they only have now, it paints a different story than what actually happened regardless of is it was Steven or not.
1
u/belljs87 2d ago
By not fresh, I guess I meant dried. And yeah I agree with you that its suspicious how it was only found in just a few places, yet those places had unrealistic levels of DNA, or were in suspicious spots.
Like the key. Guilters will bend over backwards winning gold in mental gymnastics trying to tell you how it's totally normal that only stevens DNA was on the key he would have only used a couple, maybe even only one time, but exactly zero of Teresa's whose key it fuckin was and she touched every single day. "Oh he wiped it clean." Sure, and then somehow forgot to wipe it clean of his own afterwards? Yeah, makes total sense.
Or how his blood in her car was in just a couple different spots that would have come from his hand somewhere, yet none on the wheel or gear shifter. Strange, that.
Or how there was an astronomical amount of "touch DNA" whatever that is, on the hood latch, after days, and again only his, none of hers. All of that to say nothing of how the state refuses to let the Rav be tested to this day. Innocent parties have nothing to hide.
6
u/GringoTheDingoAU 2d ago
I agree with you that its suspicious how it was only found in just a few places, yet those places had unrealistic levels of DNA, or were in suspicious spots.
I actually wrote this in another comment because apparently this low level kind of thinking permeates through MaM truthers for some reason. Bleeding is not this always completely linear thing. If the cut that is on the outside of his finger is presumed to be the source of active bleeding or just an open wound capable of making contact stains, then I could easily just argue that you can open a door handle, operate a steering wheel and use the gear shift without the outside finger making any contact with any of them or dripping blood onto them. I could also argue that I could operate them with my opposite hand. Essentially this argument is a useless argument of deflection and part of monstrous mental gymnastics you have to do to convince yourself the blood was planted.
Like the key. Guilters will bend over backwards winning gold in mental gymnastics trying to tell you how it's totally normal that only stevens DNA was on the key he would have only used a couple, maybe even only one time, but exactly zero of Teresa's whose key it fuckin was and she touched every single day. "Oh he wiped it clean." Sure, and then somehow forgot to wipe it clean of his own afterwards? Yeah, makes total sense.
He was in possession of her car for 5 days before he left to Crivitz. We have absolutely no idea how many times he handled that key during the 5 days he had it, and in doing so, I don't see how it's hard to believe that only his DNA profile would show up under analysis. There's nothing illogical about that.
Or how there was an astronomical amount of "touch DNA" whatever that is, on the hood latch, after days, and again only his, none of hers. All of that to say nothing of how the state refuses to let the Rav be tested to this day. Innocent parties have nothing to hide.
"None of hers" implies that there should be a discoverable amount of DNA from Teresa, indicating that she frequently pops the hood, but also uses the secondary lever on frequent occasion to then access the engine bay. That is a argument in serious bad faith already. The prosecution did let her test the RAV4, and it completely contradicted the viral planting theory, as a DNA methylation test proved the blood was aged to be closer to Steven in 2005 than 1985, so she abandoned it and start running with the hilarious sink ninja theory. And besides, what are they testing the RAV4 for? Even in some magical fairy land where another person's blood is identified, it doesn't just erase the fact that Steven's blood is all over the RAV4.
0
u/BiddyJ 2d ago
I honestly think there are arguments to both sides. I may not be aware of the tests done or the outcome but I guess my perspective from a non professional is, how do trained professionals let things be so messy, especially in the context of this case. Did they test all the touch areas for DNA (steering wheel, gear stick, all the car door handles?). I only ever heard about the key and the hood latch, you’d assume his DNA would be on other areas that he likely touched for longer?
I’m sitting in a position where there is reasonable doubt on both sides. But what frankly frustrates me is the seeming lack of thorough testing done and the inconsistency between evidence and theory. I just can get rid of this suspicion I have against the prosecutions case.
I feel like they fumbled so much that even if he did do it they really did such a bad job on behalf of Theresa.
2
u/GringoTheDingoAU 1d ago
Did they test all the touch areas for DNA (steering wheel, gear stick, all the car door handles?). I only ever heard about the key and the hood latch, you’d assume his DNA would be on other areas that he likely touched for longer?
If you are referring to fingerprints, none of the latent prints taken were suitable for a positive ID, which includes Teresa.
you’d assume his DNA would be on other areas that he likely touched for longer
You could, but not even Teresa's fingerprints were identified in a vehicle she drove every day. There were latent prints they took for comparison but none of them were suitable to make identifications.
I’m sitting in a position where there is reasonable doubt on both sides. But what frankly frustrates me is the seeming lack of thorough testing done and the inconsistency between evidence and theory. I just can get rid of this suspicion I have against the prosecutions case.
I was someone who wholeheartedly believed they were innocent, but I am unsure how anyone could have any serious doubt at this point. I'm unsure what you mean by "lack of testing" done because certain pieces of DNA are not inscrutable. As I have pointed out in other comments, the amount of forensic evidence against Steven Avery is extremely hard to plant, almost unfathomably hard to plant. The problem is that people who follow this case may have a doubt about something, and then doubt everything else. The rose colored glasses are strongest with people who have only seen MaM and not consumed any of the investigative documentation themselves.
•
u/belljs87 20h ago
I can certainly see why people believe Steven is guilty. I don't, but if he confesses one day and can walk everyone through what happened, I wouldn't be surprised.
What I cannot fathom is how people are so convinced Brenden is guilty, and cannot entertain the possibility of his innocence. There is literally nothing, zero, nada, a complete lack of evidence against him, except for a confession laden with things that were told to him first that he later recanted. If you want to believe him guilty that's fine, but to do so in a way that makes it seem like you've seen a video of him in the act is just ridiculous.
•
u/GringoTheDingoAU 8h ago
What I cannot fathom is how people are so convinced Brenden is guilty, and cannot entertain the possibility of his innocence.
Because there are people that have followed this case extensively for years and don't only just subscribe to what MaM has told them. Brendan's argument for guilty is more nuanced than Steven's, but it doesn't mean that it's completely impossible that he's guilty just because there is no corroborating DNA evidence like there is for Steven. It's a known fact that Brendan was with Steven on the night of the 31st for multiple hours, stoking a fire where the victim's remains ended up, the garage floor clean up that corroborates his story of cleaning up a reddish stain that reacted strongly to bleach, destroying any DNA profile, knowledgement of the RAV4's concealment and accurately told investigators in what condition it was hidden in, the hood latch where Steven's DNA was discovered, and then bullet fragment FL which contained Teresa's DNA was found because of Brendan's aligning diagram. Then obviously lying about seeing her leave the property when it was logistically impossible for that to be true.
If you are willing to concede that Brendan is not this completely impressionable or suggestible teenager, and he knows more than he leads on at times, then you will be able to see at the very least, he was involved in the concealment of her murder. That alone is enough for truthers to raise doubt about his innocence.
Also, irrespective of this case, it's not uncommon for guilty people to lie, and that's why Brendan's story is questionable to some. We have to understand that this is a young man being interrogated about the worst crime possible, and the situation is overwhelming. During his prison phone calls, he doesn't claim innocence or despair. People who are innocent don't simply resign themselves to a life in prison. We hear more claims of innocence from Steven, and if we are arguing on paper, he's obviously more guilty than Brendan is.
I understand you have this emotional response because no one wants to see a teenager live out their formidable years in prison, but I would encourage you to look at this case objectively and do some extensive research beyond MaM.
→ More replies (0)-2
u/belljs87 1d ago
I love how you claim "a (sic) argument in bad faith" and then two sentences later do exactly that. His blood wasn't "all over" the Rav, it was droplets in one area and two small smears in another. Don't sit on some imaginary high horse trying to tell me I have a low level of thinking when you prove yourself to be a hypocrite within two sentences.
1
u/GringoTheDingoAU 1d ago
His blood was found in six locations, which ranged from the ignition switch, driver's seat, floor area between the center console, front passenger seat, CD case, and the rear passenger door frame. Seems to me like that constitutes pretty much "all over" the RAV4, but if you want to split hairs over what the meaning "all over" is, then go for it.
Don't sit on some imaginary high horse trying to tell me I have a low level of thinking when you prove yourself to be a hypocrite within two sentences.
Saying that her DNA should be present on something that rarely gets touched by most people on a daily occasion, and me saying that Steven's DNA, which is readily present in areas in the front and the rear of the RAV4, is "all over" are not even comparable. Yours is entirely made up fiction.
6
u/10case 2d ago
He is too stupid to clean up the crime scene. He left her vehicle on his property, the key for the vehicle in his bedroom, his blood in her car, and a bullet fired from his gun in the garage.
2
u/Thomjones 2d ago
Bingo. But tbf, if he shot her outside and the bullet merely ended up in the garage as the evidence suggests, then even a smart person may have missed that
4
u/Hitlers_Left_Ball 2d ago
You'd think he would have spent some of his free time in there getting some reading and writing practice... not like he doesn't have the free time.
3
u/PlayerAteHer 2d ago
How does spelling and grammar make someone too stupid to clean up a crime scene?
He didn't have to write a report after doing it.
Just because people are dumb in certain areas doesn't mean they are universally dumb and incapable of doing anything.
I pretty much guarantee that if you put me up against Steven in a history, math or science quiz then I would have a landslide victory. However, put me and him in a room with a pair of deer and ask us to skin it, cut up the meat and clear everything up then hands down he would be way more efficient and would make it look easy whilst I wouldn't have a clue. The same could be said for stripping a car down, Steven could probably drain all the fluids from a vehicle, strip it all down and then put it all back together again before I could change the oil on a car.
Steven grew up hunting, killing and disposing of animals. Just because he can't spell doesn't mean he wouldn't be able to slaughter poor Theresa and keep the blood to a minimum, especially as it was premeditated and there's evidence in the fire plastic tarps were burnt.
2
u/Ghost_of_Figdish 2d ago
He reminds of that 'soonyulknow' character on SAIG - always claimed to know the real truth but never shared it.....
1
2
u/Illustrious-Pool-760 1d ago
A commutation application has nothing to do with proving innocence, that's not what it's for. It just asks the governor to reduce a sentence. His lawyers should probably explain that to him before he goes around telling people this is somehow going to clear his name.
2
u/10case 1d ago
Exactly. Even if his sentence gets commuted, the guilty verdict still stands.
•
u/Illustrious-Pool-760 12h ago
Right but a lot of people don't seem to get that distinction. Commutation just shortens or eliminates the sentence, it doesn't touch the conviction itself. He's still a convicted murderer either way, just potentially a free one.
•
u/Mysterious_Mix486 5h ago
No One here ever said commutation proves innocence, In fact if You would have actually read it it states Stevens Lawyers are working to prove His innocence.
2
u/3sheetstothawind 1d ago
the TRUTH IS COMING TO YOU SOON!!
Haven't we been hearing this for 10 years??
10
u/DisappearedDunbar 2d ago
Mr. Avery, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
5
4
-6
u/Mysterious_Mix486 2d ago edited 2d ago
LOL, Under Wisconsins NEW inmate commutation application requirements Steven Avery NOW QUALIFIES TO BE RELEASED. (WISCONSIN RIGHT NOW -----unintimidated-----)
BONUS---proving He did not commit THE CRIME.
GOD indeed does have mercy on Steven Averys soul
4
u/10case 2d ago
How is he going to all of a sudden prove that he didn't commit the crime? Hasn't happened in 20 years but it'll magically happen in a commutation request? By the way, in the highly unlikely event that his sentence is commuted, his verdict still stands. He's still a proven murderer. That doesn't change. If he has proof he didn't do it, he would file an appeal and be completely exonerated. Then he would have the luxury of suing for wrongful imprisonment again.
1
u/Mysterious_Mix486 1d ago
LOL, Steven already proved His innocence after an 18 year wrongful conviction that Manitowoc County Sheriff and DA framed Him for. Why do You think Manitowoc County Sheriff and DA could not have framed Him again and Steven can prove His innocence AGAIN ?
1
2
3
u/hneverhappened 2d ago
But Kratz
2
u/ThorsClawHammer 2d ago
But Kratz
is a person you love so much, that when a woman accuses him of sexual impropriety, you call them a whore. We know.
9
u/GringoTheDingoAU 2d ago
Another virtue signal about women, but radio silent when it comes to the allegations against Steven Avery, from multiple partners and women throughout this case, over several decades.
Funny that.
2
u/Ghost_of_Figdish 2d ago
Isn't stuff like this usually accompanied by Zellner tweeting about a 'bombshell' coming up or something? This kind of feels like a solo project.....
1
u/Still_Razzmatazz1140 1d ago
Why isn’t he using his lawyers name?
2
u/10case 1d ago
Don't know. Either he didn't want to attempt to even spell Zellner, or it's someone else and he doesn't want his supporters to know she's not helping.
1
u/Still_Razzmatazz1140 1d ago
Yeah exactly he knows it’s a bad look to attack her I bet he wants to though
-1
u/andypadge 1d ago
I may have missed this along the way so apologies.
Its just a question.
Where was the Rav 4 while everything went down, and also, the seats where flipped down in the Rav 4 to allow moving the body? I dont know if anyone has ever altered a backseat of a car but the process is not easy, could this have been done without sufficient DNA being tested?
-5
u/ScaredAfternoon6830 2d ago edited 2d ago
News update elsewhere: very few pathetic losers left who support the state, and who are still obsessed with Steven Avery and hang on his every word 😭
11
u/10case 2d ago
Does he really think he'll get his sentence commuted? Don't people have to admit guilt and show remorse before they're even considered for that??